+1 since it will be in the right hand. we have done that before. like jaxws, izpack, etc
-D On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Benjamin Bentmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Holroyd schrieb: > >> I am ok with this personally, as I'd hope that the plugin has a better >> chance of be kept up to date with advances in the core tool by having >> the code colocated. > > +1, I agree with your reasoning. > >> Should I start a vote on this > > Might be advisable to get this a little more "formally" and save you from > any complaints. In the past, there were similar votes for the Shade Plugin > [0] and the Cobertura Plugin [1]. > > I guess in the end, it's just a question what to do with the sources here at > Mojo. AFAIK, the source right now being ASL-2 licensed doesn't prohibit the > ANTLR folks from creating their own branch. So, we can either remove the > sources at Mojo right away or just wait until they are sufficiently orphaned > ;-) (I assume you will continue your contribution to the ANTLR project's > branch). > >> and can anyone see any disadvantages to such a move? > > Obviously loosing the SVN history, not sure how important that is though > ;-) > > > Benjamin > > > [0] http://www.nabble.com/-vote--fate-of-shade-plugin-to12565124.html > [1] > http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Move-cobertura-maven-plugin-to-cobertura.sourceforge.net-to10951839.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
