At 07:56 7/3/01 -0500, Ted Husted wrote:
>The focus of the Commons is squarely and solely on developing packages
>that can be reused by multiple
>products, both within and without Jakarta. To garner the interest of
>committers, it is important that the Commons and each of its packages be
>perceived as an independent entity. Since this is a volunteer
>meritocracy, the perception of committers is vital. No subproject can
>succeed without the earnest support of individual committers.
So you are willing to state that the only reason it is seperate is due to
the "Not Invented Here" syndrome ? Am I correct in asserting that ?
>It is our firm position that the Commons will attract more committers on
>its own than if it were aligned with any existing subproject. What
>"committers will commit to" has to be the prime consideration. Darwin
>has been trying to tell us that; it's time we listened.
I will say it again - though no one really seems to listen. What makes you
think you can do it right when so many have failed that come before you? Do
you even know why Avalon "failed" in this regard? do you know why other
attempts have failed in the past? What makes you sure that you can overcome
these issues? What is to say that 3 years from now you will not be in the
same position that Avalon is now?
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
