> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 29 September 2004 17:17
> To: Avalon Developers List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Stephen McConnell as a committer
> 
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 
> >>Ask yourself: if the HTTPD 2.0 project wiped out the documentation
of
> >>the 1.3 branch because "considered obsolete" what kind of image
would
> >>that have given the foundation? it doesn't matter that 2.0 is
soooooo
> >>much cooler than 1.3 and the documentation is way better and more
> >>professional. It does not matter for those who depened on 1.3 and
have
> >>no reason to upgrade (or such an upgrade is too expensive for them
to
> >>balance the banefits of 2.0)
> >>
> >>This is called "respect for your peers once they disagree on what
you
> >>say and they get hurt by your decisions".
> >
> > And this is a very weak argument!
> > Moving on ...
> 
> Thanks for such a great description of exactly what the problem with
you
> is.
> 
> I outlined something that was problematic for me and you outlined what
> was good for you and you disregarded my concerns as a very weak
argument.

I don't want to disregarded any valid concern. 

On the particular subject to which your remarks are related - your
example seems to me to off-the mark.  There were no incompatible version
changes. What was happening was a process of the team here recasting the
identity of Avalon to bring it in line with its developer community.
That involved reorganization of the web-site and is in part that subject
that you are addressing above. Another part not so clearly stated is the
role of the framework as a featured product of the community.

> This has to stop.

If you're saying that Avalon cannot change its identity then I guess we
have a blocker on our hands. If you're saying that I may not critique a
faulted argument - then we have another blocker.  

Cheers, Stephen.

> --
> Stefano.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to