+1 about eveything you said, although I think Peter added himself to the STATUS file to make a point about the problems with the model in general, not logging in particular.
Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:05 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > On 2/1/02 3:43 PM, "Scott Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > How do you enforce this? How do you handle this in the Avalon > > > world? I consider (only just recently, BTW), that a committer in > > > Commons is a committer to the entire commons codebase, > including the > > > sandbox. > > > > And that's the problem that I think peter is pointing out - that > > people can have binding votes on projects that they have > nothing to do > > with... > > If he votes, that means it has somethig to do with the component. > > Peter does have a lot of experience in logging - so his vote > and feedback is as valid as any other developer that > participates in the common-logger development. It is in fact > great if Peter sends his -1 and arguments on the > common-logger, as this provides feedback and is a valuable > contribution in itself. > > It would be far worse if Peter would not be able to vote. > > So the model works very well. > > > > One of the motivations for commons was a place for small*, discrete > > components to be able to be packaged and presented for > reuse by both > > Jakarta projects and developers at large. > > I think the main motivation was to promote sharing and > cooperation. Community is more important than code - and if > Peter added himself to the list of commons-logger > contributors, than that's a good step :-) > > The reverse doesn't seem to work that well - I'm not sure how > many commons contributors are going to send enough patches to > logkit to become commiters there, and then get the right to > vote. And it seems people prefer to participate and use > projects where they are not just users, but can be commiters > and express opinions and vote if they need to. > > > > I too believed then and still believe now that we would be better > > served with the conventional Apache/Jakarta committer model in > > Commons, where each component is a well defined group of interested > > people, a part of the larger community as well, of course. > > I believe we would be better served with the commons model in > apache/jakarta. > > > Costin > > > -- > 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]>
