between my returned email
feed and the record of posts on MarkMail[1] I have all the results.
If you feel your vote was missed, let me know.
On question 1, whether to adopt the augment feature code, we had:
7 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Stefan, Jan, Dominque,
Antoine
1 vote
MarkMail[1] I have all the results.
If you feel your vote was missed, let me know.
On question 1, whether to adopt the augment feature code, we had:
7 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Stefan, Jan, Dominque,
Antoine
1 vote for -0.5 from Martijn
With more than 3 +1 binding votes and
;t want to volunteer to actually implement
it. The other half didn't see the point, but neither were they blocking it.
My point is that if you were to provide an implementation in the sandbox
that optionally made references final not just for the augment feature
but also from scripting, on
I lost my email server for a few days, so I can only now close the vote
and post the results. I believe that between my returned email feed and
the record of posts on MarkMail[1] I have all the results. If you feel
your vote was missed, let me know.
On question 1, whether to adopt the augment
> what questions should appear in the vote. But since it has morphed
>> into that I've changed the subject line to make it easier for people
>> to find. So the questions are:
>>
>> 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
>>
> -0,5 : Non blo
line to make it easier for people
to find. So the questions are:
1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
-0,5 : Non blocking negative look. +1 if augment is only used to augment
(increase, extend, combine, add to the existing)
2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows r
Same here
Dominique Devienne wrote:
1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
+1
2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to
be marked as final, to avoid augmentation?
+0
3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it
> 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
+1
> 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to
>be marked as final, to avoid augmentation?
+0
> 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it
>should default to &qu
> So the questions are:
>
> 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
+1
> 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to
> be marked as final, to avoid augmentation?
+0
> 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it
> sho
[repeating part of my vote since I didn't vote on the third question
last time]
On 2010-04-14, Bruce Atherton wrote:
> 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
+1
> 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be
> marked as final, to avoid aug
On 13/04/2010 3:34 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote:
1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
+1
2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be
marked as final, to avoid augmentation?
-0
3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should
Ok, so this didn't start out as a vote thread, just my suggestion for
what questions should appear in the vote. But since it has morphed into
that I've changed the subject line to make it easier for people to find.
So the questions are:
1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feat
>
>
>> Of course, if people think that this hasn't been debated enough then we
>> can continue the conversation and have the vote later.
>>
>
> Let's please consider the fact, as pointed out by Antoine, that there is
> more or less no way to prevent manipulation of references by Java or
> scripted
On 2010-04-12, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:04 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote:
>> On 06/04/2010 8:16 AM, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
>>> The objective of this thread is to take a decision on :
>>> - restriction on augment feature
>>> - and i
On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:04 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote:
On 06/04/2010 8:16 AM, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
The objective of this thread is to take a decision on :
- restriction on augment feature
- and if the vote is in favor to choose one implementation
design to do
it
So, What&#
My opinion is that what we really need is a VOTE thread:
>
> 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant?
>
Definitively +1
> 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked
> as final, to avoid augmentation?
>
If both things ( task
uctant for complex features also because I am afraid we could start
> something that we will not have the time to finish 100% and will deliver
> with bugs.
Make sense.
As the two things (augment task / final attributes on datatypes) can be
separated, maybe we could status first on the augme
On 06/04/2010 8:16 AM, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
The objective of this thread is to take a decision on :
- restriction on augment feature
- and if the vote is in favor to choose one implementation design to do
it
So, What's your opinion ?
My opinion is that what we r
afraid we could
start something that we will not have the time to finish 100% and will
deliver with bugs.
The objective of this thread is to take a decision on :
- restriction on augment feature
- and if the vote is in favor to choose one implementation design to do
it
So, What'
is to take a decision on :
- restriction on augment feature
- and if the vote is in favor to choose one implementation design to do
it
So, What's your opinion ?
Should we introduce kind of restriction on the feature (like
"final=false") ? Or should we keep this usable
20 matches
Mail list logo
