Duncan,
all in all I hope your email doesn't mean you are leaving Ant as
implied by the article at xmlhack.com.
Just like Diane, I don't see you and the majority of the other
committers disagree about what features to implement in Ant2. There
are several different opinions on how to implement them, yes, but I
don't see a majority opinion ATM and this would be the second step
anyway.
James Duncan Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then, according to our rules, the majority of committers gets to
> decide where to take the project.
Yes, and you are a committer. You have as much power to influence this
decision as anybody else - if you want to.
> Technically I don't agree with most of the future directions spoken
> here,
I haven't seen any vote about technical issues yet, and of course,
your opinion will be very much appreciated - and if you disagree, your
-1 needs to be addressed of course.
> but if I disagree technically, that's my business and if I
> want to scratch that itch, I have every right to scratch it as I
> wish.
Of course.
> Ant 2.0 will be defined by whatever course of action the active
> developers take. It's in your hands. It always was.
I hope you are going to participate in that course, it's up to you.
> I will most likely continue to play in the 'build software' arena as
> there are technical ideas that I'd like to explore.
Please share them with us.
Thanks
Stefan
