On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:57, Leo Sutic wrote:
> > The problem occurs because people who don't contribute to a
> > component/area but are more than willing to tell others what
> > to do.
>
> There are times when one should speak up *fast* to stop something,
> or to avert something that may become a future problem.
errr .. like the vetos I have given since I have been back that have been
completely ignored so far?
> For example, I oppose the Spice dependency as I see it leading to
> future problems - licensing, dependencies, etc. You did much the
> same regarding the Lifecycle-in-Framework discussion.
You misinterpret. I don't really care if lifecycle is part of fortress or not.
I just don't want it to be part of framework or something I have to support
at any stage in the future. Technically I think it is crap but if someone
else wants to support it and implement it then goodluck to em. Best way to
learn is to do - it is how most people came around to my marker interfaces
are evil meme :) I may even be wrong and in 6 months could change my mind -
it has happened before (re legacy/wrapper stuff in framework) but usually I
have a pretty good track record of spotting crap code.
> Only if the other person is totally
> uninterested in a compromise or in figuring out a solution is there
> a problem. But I haven't seen much of that here.
It only takes one time.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
---------------------------------------------------
"Therefore it can be said that victorious warriors
win first, and then go to battle, while defeated
warriors go to battle first, and then seek to win."
- Sun Tzu, the Art Of War
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
