did you why Apache Tomcat dosn't run in Vista?? On 5/10/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/10/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/8/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [ ] +1 I support the proposal > > [ ] +0 I don't care > > [x] -1 I'm opposed to the proposal because... > > I do not feel the draft resolution adequately addresses several > remarks made in the discussion thread. I'm in agreement with Niall. I think both of the quotes below are mine, so I'll respond to those. > > The resolution should address issues raised as to the scope of the PMC > and the use of the commons namespace. Comments on the other thread > included remarks like > > * "We'll do whatever the community wants to do. If someone proposes a > Ruby library and we have a community interested in creating and > supporting a Ruby library, then it would of course be strongly > considered. " Yep, I stand by this one. Look at Jakarta's resolution and what Jakarta does now - it's clear that the community overrules the resolution and I expect it's up to the board to complain if they feel it's gone too far. > > and > > * "Multiple PMCs, one website. So we'd have Java Commons, Ruby > Commons, BobsYourUncle Commons PMCs, and they'd all share a > commons.apache.org website." This one was definitely a random suggestion. If we reach a point of impasse with another commons wanting to start, then I (with board hat on) think the solution would be to have multiple PMCs and 1 website. Or maybe that really means a portal and a site behind it. All hypothetical though - XML Commons is dead, DB Commons never happened and WS Commons is afaik not highly active. We do own the Commons space currently. > But, as it stands, the resolution implies that the proposed PMC will > be excluded to Java and would own both the top-level "Commons" project > name and the "commons.apache.org" namespace. Neither remark is > addressed. Yep. Personally I think that we don't need Java there. For two reasons: 1) It's community and day to day life that determines our scope, more so than a resoltion. 2) It's (let's face it) an easier sell without Java in the text. However the consensus was very clearly in favour of having Java in the resolution. <snip> > Let the focus of this PMC remain on Java, but, in the Apache spirit of > openness and collaboration, make way for other Apache Commons projects > in other languages. Sure - but let's discuss that then rather than now. Hypotheticals will just keep us spinning emails out ad infinitum. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Enjoy your day!! http://jeank.awardspace.com/
