Jason,
> > why aren't Ant and Maven two related projects under a single PMC?
> Well, because when Ant formed they had no desire to be grouped with
> Maven
Based upon your attitude today towards Greg, Sam, Nicola (who isn't even
here, but was accused of whining), etc., I can't say that I blame them.
Jason, I don't know you. I barely know your projects. So why would you
want this outburst to be the thing I know the most about you?
I'm sorry, Jason, and perhaps I'm not being fair but it seems that you are
having an apoplectic fit at very idea of a PMC that oversees build process
related projects. This was confusing to me, so I asked. What I am told is
that you are concerned about being stuck with Centipede and Gump, for which
you have already indicated personal disdain.
Well, fine. I don't use either and won't put forth a value judgment, but if
they suck they suck. Sam's ego will hold up. Nick seems an affable enough
person from the few messages I've read from him. The glaringly obvious
point to me is that Ant and Maven have synergy. Dion says, "we very much
have synergy with ant, and rely heavily on them." If a hypothetical build
process top level project of Ant and Maven were to replace Centipede and
Gump with code that serves the ASF's needs and sucks less, who cares? As
has often been said, the important thing is the Community, not the code.
> If there is no emergent cooperation what is the point in forcing
> collaboration? It's just not productive and how does that serve
> the purpose of making better software?
If the fundamental philosophy of the ASF is Community First, how do you feel
that you contributed to that today? How do your comments further the
purpose of making better software, the ASF Way?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
