Daniel F. Savarese wrote: > > I'm sorry, I didn't indicate that I wasn't addressing the RDB proposal, > but rather the ancillary comments about Ant, James, Log4J, Regexp, and > "other projects" being out of scope. James clearly belongs. The others are debatable, but see response to next snippet. > Keep the "scope" thread to articulating the consequences, adverse and > benign, of being "out of scope." Sam has indirectly pointed out that > there are different degrees. Log4j being here is an example of one of the *BENEFITS* of including such packages here. The rate at which packages are adopting this package is quite remarkable. Some of those benefits would disappear if this became a "Java SourceForge". Another thing to take into consideration is the wishes of the majority of committers of the code base. Particularly existing code bases. If the majority of committers of any project (or even a group of projects collectively) decided that they no longer belonged here, then I would be disappointed certainly, but I do what I could to help them with their transition. The topic of Ant came up before. The majority of committers indicated that they wished to remain in Jakarta. The board accepted Ant as within scope. Frankly, I'm irritated seeing the topic of Ant being raised in that manner again. - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
