On 1/9/02 11:36 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul, > > I believe that its possible that not enough of us understand the > background of the ARMI codebase. > > There's a lot going on, and it can be helpful to spoonfeed us old, > feeble, and bandwith-challenged folk =:0) > > Given the other tidbits that have come up in this thread, I would now > toss my binding > > +1 Ted - I have come to understand you as a stickler for rules and order (among other positive qualities :) A related thread is discussing the fact that the proposal doesn't even satisfy the rules that you took the time to record for us and post... > > It's important to understand that the sandbox is open to any Jakarta > committer, and it's helpful to make an actual proposal, as detailed in > the Commons charter, so that we know what's what. It's not 'helpful'. Isn't 'required' the word you are looking for? > If the component is also going to be useful to the Avalon codebase, then > I would say it has a high potential of being supported in the longterm, > and would be a welcome addition. Yes - that I agree with. -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting You're going to end up getting pissed at your software anyway, so you might as well not pay for it. Try Open Source. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
