Having named leads of any sort is the antithesis of what I would like
to
see within the ASF.
Fair enough, but there's no reason I can see why a JCP lead shouldn't be
an OSS chair, I guess the JCP needs spec leads like the ASF needs
chairpeople, to be a single point of refrence from above
On Mar 22, 2004, at 6:02 AM, Danny Angus wrote:
Having named leads of any sort is the antithesis of what I would
like
to
see within the ASF.
Fair enough, but there's no reason I can see why a JCP lead
shouldn't be
an OSS chair, I guess the JCP needs spec leads like the ASF needs
Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 20/03/2004 08:52:35 AM:
[snip]
We already effectively have Expert Groups, we call them the PMC. Project
Leads, aka active-voice on the project/component. I'm not sure it hurts
for us to have a project-lead on things, in fact I think it's something
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:14:13 +1100
dion wrote:
I've seen this 'defined responsibility' drive people
away from projects. (*1)
Agreed. Often *innovative* guys run away from such projects.
OSS guys do not want to take *responsibilites*, generally speaking.
Also, this often dampens the motivation
,
Paulo.
From: Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Jakarta embracing the JCP?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:44:32 -0500
How about if Jakarta [or Apache-Java as a whole] embraced the latest JCP
process
On Mar 19, 2004, at 12:17 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
This is a little linked to the Apache-open source question raised a
while
back, though it actually comes from trying to explain to someone what
the
pro's and reasons for groovy as a jsr might be.
How about if Jakarta [or Apache-Java as a
.
From: Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Jakarta embracing the JCP?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:44:32 -0500
How about if Jakarta [or Apache-Java as a whole] embraced the latest
JCP
process
On Mar 19, 2004, at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
How about if Jakarta [or Apache-Java as a whole] embraced the latest
JCP
process?
In what way? Can you be specific? As I understand the JCP, what you
are
asking makes little sense.
We don't have spec leads, nor do we want them. We don't
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
On Mar 19, 2004, at 4:52 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
I'm still in disagreement. I'm founding a lot of this on the idea that
Groovy is a good fit for a JSR. There's no reason for more than one
implementation to exist that I can think of and
Formulate new proposals to the Apache lists in a similar manner to a new
JSR and write projects up in a similar format. Have named leads and ...
Having named leads of any sort is the antithesis of what I would like to
see within the ASF.
--- Noel
10 matches
Mail list logo
