> Just go full steam ahead with 4). You contributed your packaged code to
> the logging discussion, which helped me very much. The only thing that
> stopped me from actually using it was a [PATCH] against the current
> impl. I apologize if you think you were ignored. I heard you loud and
> clear.
Hi Scott,
My problem is not exactly that I am not heard - hey, I got a lot of
replies all the time! The real issue is another one.
=;o)
I will also explain why I did not submit a patch.
Perspective:
- Since I forked a lot of Avalon stuff I ended up trying to
"improve" their Common Logging Interface... just to find out
that the original was always better than my "improvements".
- I also took a look at the Commons stuff and I just found out
that it had NOTHING that could help;
- The only other interesting logging bits I found were in
Velocity (BTW: some of it from Jon).
When I noticed how the Commons were ignoring the GREAT Avalon work
I talked about it and I posted the repackaging I was using.
Now, I always made clear that this was from Avalon. So, I know I
am not the one being ignored.
After posting that code twice, insisting a lot and getting several
evasives, I finally got this reply when remarking yet AGAIN on how
the Commons were reinventing all of Avalon wheels from scratch:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 7:44 PM
> Subject: Re: how should log levels work? [Was Re: [Logging] default log
> level]
>
> ...
>
> <sigh> i'd hoped that i wouldn't have to get into this </sigh>
>
> i know peter's views on logging pretty well. i think that the only way
> that we'll ever achieve what we need - a minimal component-oriented
> logging system - is by ignoring them and going back to first principles.
>
> i've said before that i'd be very happy to consider your suggestion as a
> 'second generation commons logging package' but anything with
> peter's name
> anywhere near it is too divisive for me to even consider as a first
> generation solution.
So, THIS IS MY PROBLEM.
And my problem is not just with Robert since EVEN after this was
posted everybody went around just getting the Avalon code.
Some people picked some pieces from it or learned something from
it that applied to the Commons stuff. But that was it.
Everybody accommodated Robert's personal problems with Peter with
a huge waste of energy and time.
Look, I had (and keep having) huge flame wars with Jon and that
does not stop me from:
- Learning from him (when he is readable);
- Agreeing with him;
- Using his code.
Jon also NEVER flamed me on a technical issue except when he
clearly has a different opinion. It was NEVER "I do not agree
because it is Paulo saying" and I NEVER felt it that way.
(Ok, this does not apply to less objective matters.)
My problem is this "I do not agree because it is from X".
Even I and Jon can avoid this!
Get personal and have a good fight, but only outside the
"school", ok kids?
Now, I considered submitting a patch... but how could I? If I
would patch the commons my patch would HAVE TO include Peter
Donald's name! Most of this code is not mine. All of the core
code is from him.
But then it seems obvious that Robert would have a problem with
this.
But now lets consider this facts:
- The current Commons interface is almost a copy of Avalon's
interface;
- It was quite a bit guided by my suggestions (hey, they were
accepted!);
- And (at least) Craig took a look at it for one of the
wrappers.
Look: Craig placed my name on the DynaBean code because of this
kind of opinion-contribution.
=== FINALLY THE "WHAT I REALLY WANT" PART ===
I do not want my name on the Commons Logging stuff BUT I WANT
Peter Donald's NAME THERE AS A CONTRIBUTOR! It was his knowledge
that was used trough me.
And I would appreciate very much if this kind of spoiled brat
behavior would not be silently accommodated in the future!
Thanks for your attention and have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 8:52 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: RE: To fork or not to fork (was: AltRMI Tasks if anyone want to
> take them)
>
>
> Just go full steam ahead with 4). You contributed your packaged code to
> the logging discussion, which helped me very much. The only thing that
> stopped me from actually using it was a [PATCH] against the current
> impl. I apologize if you think you were ignored. I heard you loud and
> clear.
>
> Cheers,
> Scott (Trying to erase the bad blood between Avalon and commons)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paulo Gaspar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 5:24 AM
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > Subject: RE: To fork or not to fork (was: AltRMI Tasks if
> > anyone want to take them)
> >
> >
> > Sam, I first tried 4) and 1) with the Common Logging Interface.
> >
> > Since that was frustrating I am now going trough 2).
> > =;o)
> >
> > The waste of 3) is in this case harder to accept. Even Jon
> > agrees with that (when it is not me saying it, at least).
> >
> >
> > What I would like from 2) is that there is more people
> > agreeing that it is better to fork code in the conditions I
> > described instead of just re-implementing it from scratch. It
> > seems that the later is becoming current practice.
> >
> > I would not spend so much energy on this if I did not care
> > about Apache.
> >
> >
> > Thanks anyway: adult advice is much nicer to hear (read) than
> > the alternative.
> >
> >
> > Have fun,
> > Paulo Gaspar
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 1:41 PM
> > >
> > > Paulo Gaspar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Sam, but my mood about this is too bad to relax.
> > >
> > > You read my intentions correctly. But there is a deeper
> > message. if
> > > you care to look. The problems that you are pointing out are not
> > > unique to Jon, Peter, yourself, commons, Jakarta, or even Apache.
> > >
> > > Generally, if you see something you believe is wrong, plain
> > wrong, as
> > > obvious as the nose on your face, to the point where it amazes you
> > > that others don't see the problem, there are several things you can
> > > do:
> > >
> > > 1) you can patiently try to work with others to get them
> > to address the
> > > problem Quite frankly, this doesn't always work.
> > >
> > > 2) you can yell or pout. Believe it or not, this actually works
> > > sometimes too. But not always.
> > >
> > > 3) you can accept the current state as it is. Sometime
> > this isn't
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > 4) or, you can engage.
> > >
> > > As always, the choice is yours.
> > >
> > > - Sam Ruby
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:commons-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For
> > additional commands,
> > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
