Russel Winder wrote:
> [ . . . ]
>> One of the reasons that we have our own fork of Gradle currently is that we
>> needed to be able to programmatically construct the set of projects used in a
>> build. We would like to to accomplish the same goals with this, but it looks
>> like you may be planning to use AST transformations or another compile time
>> technique to implement your scheme. If so, please provide an API oriented
>> alternative.
> [ . . . ]
>
> Having a fork already at this stage in the life of a project is clearly
> not a good thing. Hopefully there is a way of reconciling this issue so
> that we can return to having a single mainline.
>
> I appreciate this email is not contributing anything technical to the
> debate I just wanted to point out the need to avoid a fork that is not a
> friendly, and temporary, one.
>
Our fork is intended to be temporary. We have discussed several of our concerns
with Hans and I think all of our needs will be met in a future release
(hopefully 0.7). We just couldn't get everything addressed in 0.6. The fork is
a way for us to apply our own bug fixes in an timely manner and try out ideas
for new features we need.
--
Steve Appling
Automated Logic Research Team
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
