On 29 February 2012 15:39, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote: > On 02/29/2012 03:52 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
... > I would propose that an ASF project SHOULD not use 3rd party namespaces, > unless there is a very strong and logical requirement to do so. > I'm explicitly not using the term MUST here. +1 When I championed Jena we discussed this. The team agreed that the change should be made but insisted that doing so as part of a point release would be very difficult for the community. They were concerned that it would hold up graduation if they MUST make the change. I asked the question, I think on general@, but possibly members@. I was assured that it SHOULD be done but that it was recognised this is not always possible during incubation. I'm not going to comment on Sqoop as I have not looked at the specifics. However, I believe Jena have a strong case (which is rooted in supporting a large and pre-existing user community). Furthermore, they have a commitment to move away from the old namespace. I guess one big difference here is that the company represented in the Jena namespace is no longer active in the community. I'll let others figure out the Sqoop case, but I want to show strong support for SHOULD versus MUST as outlined by Ate. Ross --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
