+ 1 on the separate repository. Would we just give access to anyone who is
willing to maintain a project descriptor?
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "josh lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: Should Gump/AntGump/Maven become a separate project?
> On Wed, 2001-08-29 at 08:10, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > On 8/29/01 10:22 AM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > First my thoughts - should Alexandria look like it was going to go
into a
> > > long term hibernation again, I would say yes. Otherwise - as long as
it
> > > looks like there is a hope that Alexandria would subsume the
functionally
> > > included by Gump, I would prefer it stay here.
> >
> > I would like it to stay too, I think the inter-project build and
continuous
> > integration ideas are ones that belong in alexandria.
> >
> > > Josh's joining the project rekindles the hope that Alexandria will
live on.
> > >
> > > Follow-on question: Victor has expressed an interest in maintaining
his own
> > > project defintions.
> >
> > Sorry, I don't know which Victor you're talking about :-)
> >
> > > I'm inclined to put this to a vote, and indicate my
> > > support. This is related to the question above as the level of
granularity
> > > for karma is at the cvs module level. Thoughts?
> >
> > I think any project that wants to maintain their descriptor should be
free
> > to do so. How about putting the descriptors themselves in a separate
> > repository and allow access to anyone on a project that requests it?
> >
>
> +1 on a separate repository.
>
>
> josh
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
