On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Scott Sanders wrote: > +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.
And if a commiter logs in jakarta, removes all the files in the CVS or breaks in - it'll make a point that nobody should be trusted ? Of if he changes the jakarta-site and adds some inaproriate content, will that mean we shouldn't allow commiters to access the jakarta-site ? Any model has problems. I don't know what's the right solution, but it can happen in any project - if someone wants to contribute to tomcat he can become a commiter and play the same -1 game there, as in any other project. Costin > > 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]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
