Ceki Gülcü wrote: > > +1 on the principle of merging Jakarta and XML. However, you realize > there are technical considerations such as the look and fell of the > merged web-site. More importantly, what would be the scope of the merged > XML+Jakarta?
The more important question is what is the community model. As the XML bylaws are clones of the Jakarta ones, I would venture to say that they are fairly compatible. > How should we call the combined project? ApacheGrabBag? SourceForgeII? Jakarta. [Note: answer above is merely to show that the proposal is not a serious one] One thing I would like people to think about. I see viceral reaction at times to putting things in commons. Or in Avalon/Turbine/Struts, etc. And often there is lengthy debates about whether something belongs in Jakarta or not. Yet, curiously, there seems to be little consideration as to whether something belongs in Apache or not. How many people here know what the Apache board does? Here's a concrete example to illustrate the issue: I've always been under the assumption that at some point a few people in Jakarta land would take a sustained interest in contributing code to Gump, at which point, I would propose it to be a formal subproject. At the present time, it looks like there is a greater possibility of interest of contributing by people in XML land. This lead to a bit of soul searching, and I came to conclusion that if that were to come to pass, I would follow the community. After all, what does it really matter whether the code is jakarta-gump or xml-whatever? - Sam Ruby -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
