Berin Loritsch wrote:
I think I eloquently stated my position, and I believe my goal is compatible with yours.
I agree completely. You elequantly confirmed that you don't understand the problem. You eloquently described your *fear* of the pollution of the avalon namespace. You eloquently described you *uncertainty* as to technical applicability, and you eloquently described your *doubt* with respect to utility. This is common referred to *FUD*.
Is this how you define "working with others"? I put forth my concerns in as simple and unconfrontational method as I could. I would appreciate it if you would return the favor. I would also appreciate it if you would meet halfway on this which you seem to be unable to do, and cannot express why.
The only person who is making a Merlin release a big deal is yourself.
Pete Royal just negated your assertion.
You commenced the process by stating that you would block a release unless it fulfilled you preconditions. This statement was grossly misleading simply because you do not have that authority. It is this majority of committers in this community of which you are only one that carry the decision on a release. Secondly, you have argued your FUD agenda using every possible avenue including threats of my dismissal from Avalon. We are not 90% on anything. I moved what is a complete, working and stable sub-system out of Merlin and into sandbox to facilitate collaboration on establishing a common platform. A lot of time has been spent addressing many aspects bringing in in-line. During that process you have launched what can only be described as an attack against me on the subject of extensions. And yet your rationalization comes down to nothing more than FUD arrising from you self proclaimed lack of knowledge. Once you actually take the time to address the technical issues - there will be the potential to reach 100%. In the meantime you have a lot of credibility that you need to recover.
Did I EVER threaten to dismiss you from Avalon? Please point out the exact message, complete with a link. What you have just done is defined as either slander or libel depending on how you interpret emails (written or spoken word). It is a serious allegation, and without PROOF which is your burden, I demand and appology.
I also expect you to come to grips with reality. Take a break if you have to.
All a user needs to know is that if they implement the set of Avalon tags, their
component will work accross all the containers.
Look - you said it here "All a user needs to know is that if they implement the set of Avalon tags" and yet you want to fragment that same namespace in such a way that users of will be obliged to use Avalon tags plus Lifecycle tags. This is simply indicative of the problem you are creating. Your statement reflects the impact of your suggestion - disenfranchising a core subset of a object model simply because you do not understand it.
?! Come again? I don't understand your logic here.
On one hand you imply support for the meta-info model as it is - with full support for stage and extension declaration. On the other hand you claim that these features are not needed, unsupported, and you even go so far to imply that related products are not released. In the context of all of this - I have zero confidence that you will not continue this process of disruption and fragmentation into the tools and the meta-info API.
?! Come again? I never suggested full support for the stage and extension declaration. I suggested support for it as a starting point--that is all. I also never said that the features were not needed, but I did correct your assertions.
Let's start with what we know. We can add in what we don't over time.
I suggest we move @avalon.meta -or @merlin - we maintain integrity of the model. And you can sleep at night in the knowledge that your Avalon namespace is clean. In the meantime some up who are much more interested in putting together a complete and integral solution can get on with the things we like doing.
Why are you posturing? There is no need.
If we release the general Meta Info library with the set of Avalon tags we have
agreed to up to this point,
We haven’t agreed anything of substance. We have an AMTAGS proposal that does not meet requirements. We have you attempt to force a decision from a position of ignorance that not only is biased against the Merlin platform, but will itself lead to fragmentation and confusion.
The ONLY thing we have not agreed to is the extension/stage tags. That is it. Everything else is ok. So are you saying that unless extension/stage are included in the Avalon namespace that we haven't agreed to anything of substance?
Why respond to kind words with harsh?
then after we incorporate it into Fortress and Phoenix, I have no issues with a Merlin release.
More preconditions? Perhaps you could do everyone a favor and stop this ridiculous process of preconditioning. While you’re at it - could you pull back on the FUD and drop the threats. In the meantime I'm going back to things that are fun and interesting. In particular, I will continue to move Merlin forward with the support of the user community as a complete and viable solution.
How about one more. Unless you stop your own FUD marketing and threats no Merlin technology can be released in any way shape or form. As long as you continue to attack those trying to work with you and refuse to work with anyone else (including me) I definitely cannot support its release. It's that simple.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
