On the same reasons I would say (3). Especially we had spoken about breaking Ant into modules and moving to SVN ... (last year at your home, Stefan :) I think a new subproject would be the right place because Ant targets a development with Java while these new tasks targets a development for .NET. Same as on Log4J/Log4C/... all under the logging-project, but individual subprojects. ... and ... why do we have a top level project ;-)
It´s ever the same if a committer has an idea about an addition to Ant. So the only way is to ask the rest of committers. Jan > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet am: Freitag, 17. September 2004 13:49 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Where should the dotnet sandbox go? > > Hi > > it seems as if my little experiment with <nunit> and friends has found > at least a few people who want to use it, so I'm now at the point to > decide on its future. > > I see a couple of options and want to hear your opinions: > > (1) add them to Ant's CVS HEAD > > (2) move them to a different place outside of the ASF > > (3) start a new Antlibs subproject of Ant and make this (one of) its > founding component(s). > > My opinions: > > (1) isn't fair considering the number of people we send away. I'd > feel like abusing my committer power. The target audience for the > tasks simply isn't big enough. > > (2) works for me. > > (3) works for me as well and would be my preference. In particular if > Steve or anybody else of the committers want to work on it as well. > > This would require thinking about that new subproject's agenda and how > we'd decide which components get added or how to distribute commit > access, but I don't want to go into detail here, without knowing > whether this is something the rest of the committers/PMC would like to > see happen. > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
