I agree with everything Martin said. I often read codec messages and if it wasn't hosted in Jakarta commons I wouldn't have worked on the DigestUtils code. Granted, that code is a very small piece of codec but I think it says a lot about the community that people unrelated to a particular project are willing to volunteer their time on small pieces.
David --- Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Tim O'Brien wrote: > > > Enough people profess interest in using this product, but only a few > > committers (myself and Gary) actually go about the business of > > contributing. Believe it or not, I think that components get lost in > > the signal to noise ratio of the Jakarta Commons development mailing > list. > > To a certain extent, I agree with you. However, I think things would get > worse rather than better if Codec moves off to A-C and has its own > lists, > etc. > > Here at J-C, Codec (and all of the other active components) gets a good > deal of exposure. The discussions are out there in front of a > substantial > audience of Java developers. Most may not contribute, but you have no > way > of telling how many people *read* the posts. That is really very > valuable, > even though it might not seem so at first blush. > > If, at some point, I decide I need a Codec like component, I know > exactly > where I'll turn to get one. I know, from following the posts, that I'll > get a component I can rely on. I'll also have a certain degree of trust > in > it from knowing the people who have worked on it. > > If Codec moves off on its own, and I no longer see the discussions, the > commits, or the bug reports, then I won't have that same trust in it. > I'm > not so interested in a Codec component right now that I would subscribe > to > yet another mailing list just to see those discussions. > > Now when I *do* need a Codec component, it's certainly likely that I > would > look at A-C if there's no longer one at J-C. But if the committers to it > are now disjoint from those remaining at J-C, my trust level is lower. > Now > it's not much different to me than an SF equivalent, except that it's at > Apache (which is not to be sniffed at, of course). > > Anyway, all of the above is a rather long-winded way of saying that I > don't think Codec moving out of J-C and into A-C is a good idea. As some > others have said before me, I think J-C has a great deal of value in > just > staying together, wherever that might take us. > > -- > Martin Cooper > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
