> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > [...] > > 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. > > > > 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. > > Despite a feeling by some that a decision has been taken on this, > current votes stand in a tie like this: > > o Creation of an "avalon" CVS repository for new Avalon5 > codebase > +1: nicolaken, mcconnell > +0: cziegeler > -0: proyal > -1: leosimons, leif > > > Anyone else wants to say his?
I think the deadlock (and the few votes) is reason enough to just hit the "pause" button on this voting for say, two-three days, and then try again. Let's have a go at the charter first, and then re-visit this one. Does that sound sensible? I am +1 for the new CVS (I think we should have an avalon CVS instead of a jakarta-avalon anyway), and I think that this new unified effort should have a CVS of its own (no need to have "proposal" directories and stuff like that + it doesn't make the new effort a sub-project of some existing module). OTOH, I am reflexively against creating "new playgrounds", maybe irrationally so. But the fact that this vote ran into a deadlock makes me not want to tip the balance. /LS -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
