Randall J. Parr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would definitely prefer that Ant (and ORO, Log4J, ...) stay an > Apache project and/or subproject.
Just to clarify this. Moving Ant out of Jakarta wouldn't necessary mean it couldn't remain an Apache project, not at all. I've seen four Ant committers give their opinion so far - and nobody wanted to leave the Apache umbrella IIRC. > I would argue that ORO, RegExpr, even Log4J are just as much out of > scope as Ant. Sure they are. But I doubt something like RegExpr has a community to carry it as a stand alone project (I've received three mails on the -dev list this month, all being spam) - Ant and probably Log4J would be different. > It is very frustrating to see Apache projects, even subprojects in > the same project all using a different methods to handle > configruation and logging. Part of it is software Darwinism. Avalon has its own logging and configuration framework for example - and you won't gain too many friends if you ask them to switch to log4j I guess. There are subprojects at jakarta with overlapping goals (or even solving the same problems just using a different technology) - take ORO and regexp for example, struts and turbine to some degree. People building Apache project communities work on their projects because that's what makes them happy. If you go out and tell them "drop your framework X and start using Y" this is not going to work. Eventually a project will attract all developers and the other one will die - sometimes this doesn't happen and you end up with two healthy communities (that usually hate each other) in two healthy and very similar projects living next to each other. The later is what happened for the GNU Emacs and XEmacs communities. Stefan
