Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I assume there will be multiple proposals going on in which case we can get things like; proposals/red proposals/blue proposals/green when one of them looks like it is a winner and has enough momentum split off a new CVS then.
I've read Rules for Revolutionaries, too. But isn't the entire point of this exercise to move forward with ONE voice? I don't believe that institutionalizing factions is the best way to address that issue.
Agreed.
The more I read the discussions here, the more it seems to me that the only
thing that is going to get this community moving forward in unison is to
have a single community container (scalable and profiled) under an Avalon
CVS module, and preserve avalon-phoenix, avalon-excalibur/merlin, et al, for
Avalon 4 container development while Avalon 5 is developed.
I propose we have a new "avalon" CVS repository where to develop the new Avalon5 system. Things will be discussed and committed only when decided upon, and still eventually changed when again decided upon.
+1
This will make us do a clear cut with previous development methods, and clearly indicate that it's a new effort and that the old will be nevertheless maintained.
+1 for a new "avalon" CVS repository
Alternatively it can be called avalon5, avalonV, aValon, avalon-5, avalon-ng... the important thing is that it's there.
"avalon" is what I think it should be (as distinct from our heritage under jakarta-avalon)
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL digital products for a global economy mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osm.net
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
