[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Anyone can ( and should ) vote on those issues, but only jakarta-tools
> commiter votes will be counted ( for the first one). If the first vote is
> positive, all commter votes will be counted for the second :-)
>
OK, since you put it formally, I will as well: -1
For the following reasons:
* Although the Ant code in jakarta-tools is no longer used, the
other components (moo) are used in jakarta-watchdog. This
codebase is not an orphan. (Creating a new CVS repository
under some other name would deal with this issue, but that's
a new project and needs to go through the usual process).
* There is no precedent or process yet within Jakarta for a
codebase that belongs to more than one subproject. The
rules for voting and such would need to be defined -- therefore,
this proposal is premature. (NOTE: even if we just accept
the typical vote counting rules, the "every committer on a
subproject is also a committer here" rule would tend to give subprojects
with large committer counts inordinate influence on the direction
of the shared library code).
* It is not clear that consensus on process and procedure *can*
be gained -- we're only starting to actively discuss it. Effort that
is invested in checking in code now will be potentially wasted
(if no consensus is ever reached) or need to be redone anyway
(once process/procedure questions are resolved), leading to a
lack of efficiency.
* There is no need to post code into a single repository in order
to accomplish the objective of looking at what we already have.
After all, this is open source :-). Pointers to the classes and
modules you think might be useful candidates are certainly
sufficient for that.
>
> Costin
>
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
