On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:25:03 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
On 04/12/2017 05:29 PM, Gilles wrote:
Do you actually prefer advertizing a non-Apache project rather than
having the PMC support its own developers in any which way it could?
If nobody is able to maintain commons-math I have no objection
recommending an alternative, especially one that is derived from
commons-math, has the same license and an open development process.
The issue here is that an "in-house" solution has been proposed,
based on time-consuming work on the part of developers still
contributing here.
The PMC members should logically (?) favour any proper endeavour
that attempts to keep _this_ community alive.
For functionality that requires expertise not existing anymore around
here, it would be fine though, of course.
Thus I ask that we make a list of such functionality before dismissing
the local goodwill as if it didn't exist.
The minimal support you can expect from the PMC members is people
voting
on the releases, and if there is no show stopper like binary
incompatibilities, awful regressions or improperly licensed code, the
vote will be a non-issue.
How can you be so sure? The last releases did not elicit an awful
lot
of votes; and that is for components that do not raise objections
about
their mere existence.
Give it a try?
OK for small, focused, components?
Gilles
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
