+1 to all of the below. Well said. - Leo
On Mon, 2002-07-08 at 15:45, Berin Loritsch wrote: > As someone already pointed out, CVS is not the place to do battle. I do > not > want to see a bunch of commit messages with "Revert" as the only word. > Any > time something is reverted, there has to be more explanation. *WHY* was > it > reverted? > > The issues on the plate at this time are: > > 1) Source code header files. By mandate of Apache Software Foundation > (higher > than Jakarta or XML project committes) we *need* the full version. I > started > to put them in, but someone reverted them. I am not going to fight > it in > CVS, so let's get it done here. Stefano already took it as high as > he could, > so until we have the version 2.0 license available, we need to use > the full > version. > > 2) The pissing match between Peter and Stephen. Stephen made a change > to ContainerKit, > Peter posted a "Revert" CVS commit. No explanation that I saw. This > type of > stuff pisses me off. If there is a reason, enlighten the rest of us. > > 3) "Sky is falling argument." Peter has used this in several of his > arguments > saying that in six months we'll see it his way. Yet he fails to > enlighten us > to exactly what his way is. Sometimes the difference is so small, > yet the other > person is so stubborn that you would have to be a scientist to notice > the > difference. Hense the question of "What's the big deal?" > > 4) Ownership of code. The code here belongs to the community. There is > no "my > code" concept here. If you feel compelled to have the concept of "my > code", > then store it on your own server. It will be "your code" forever, > and noone > will use it. > > Most important, I want the "Revert" crap to stop. If there is a > legitimate issue, > raise it in the list. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
