On 5/30/07, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Pete--
I could be interested in being the Jakarta commons
conduit for a revival of the functor code. According
to the jakarta website, "A revival of a Commons
Dormant component must be preceded by a VOTE on the
commons developers mailing list." Is there a general
feeling on-list as to whether the vote should be held,
<snip/>
I think its good to have the vote as suggested (after any preliminary
discussion here). While its a lower bar than sandbox graduation, I
think its useful to gauge interest and makes it harder for the change
to slip under people's radar etc. As an aside, I do not have any
cycles to help with functor ATM.
-Rahul
or any thoughts on why the revival of [functor] would
be ill-advised?
-Matt
--- Pete Aykroyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm not really sure how this is done but over the
> past year and a half
> or so, I've been working one of the original functor
> contributors,
> Jason Horman, on a branch of functor and we've made
> a lot of progress
> with it. For example, it's updated to take advantage
> of generics which
> is extremely helpful and also have done a lot work
> developing
> compilers that allows you to translate expressions
> into runtime
> functions, etc. This has been extremely useful for
> us on our project
> and we'd like to get this code back into the main
> branch.
>
> I've emailed Rodney Waldhoff, who is listed as the
> project lead for
> functor but haven't heard back. There's been no
> progress on functor
> since 2005 and I don't want to step on toes, but I'm
> also interested
> in contributing to the community.
>
> Any pointers on what can be done would be
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pete
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
