On Jan 18, 2011, at 2:37 PM, Steven A Rowe wrote: > On 1/18/2011 at 1:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote: >> At some point, Grant or someone put in some Maven poms. I don't think >> anyone else really paid attention. Later, as we did releases, and saw and >> dealt with these poms, most of us commented against Maven support. It just >> feels to me like it slipped in - and really its the type of thing that >> should have been more discussed and thought out, and perhaps voted upon. >> Maven snuck into Lucene IMO. > > Lucene's policy is commit-then-review, and lazy consensus is the rule, right?
Right - clearly this is not some sneaky or underhanded thing that happened. Certainly this is how a lot of legit things happen. The only reason I feel it was more of a Maven sneaking in thing is that in IRC I have learned how many active core devs really didn't want Maven in the build at a later time. I think we just didn't really know what was happening / paid attention. I don't mean to characterize incorrectly. If you asked me back then, I prob would not have understood the consequences whatsoever and said, please go ahead! Patches welcome. People's opinions have shifted though - we have more committers now - perhaps the Maven support side is larger than the against now. Just stating things as I roughly knew them - happy to see things cleared up, fined tuned. - Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
