On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 09:29:18PM +1100, Peter Donald wrote: ... > > To drive this point home, the subject line of this thread identifies > > exactly one such set of duplication - between Turbine and Struts. My > > nagging lead Berin to propose moving the Avalon collections code into > > commons, to which you responded, and I quote, "+/- 0". > > I was hoping Jeff would do it as he seemed to be involved over there ;)
I saw the "+/- 0", and that Berin hadn't voted, and then thought of how this would look to Commons people: as a code "dump"; abandoned by it's authors, singlehandedly maintained by someone who might disappear at any moment (from their POV; I'm not going anywhere;). Quite a big ask. Though if you're okay with it (forking is a bit.. impolite:), I'll make an attempt sometime late Feb (after holidays.. wheee). > I have no time atm and no real motiviation to do it. Last time I was > on the list I watched 3 things be proposed to commons - nobody even > voted !!! There was no response whatsoever. Apparently Jeff has > similar comments when he offered some of the avalon bits over there. 'twasn't Avalon code, but yes.. it pains me to think of all those XML doctype decls flying around, unchanged.. ;) The lack of project-wide sense of responsibility is the biggest problem for Commons (and jakarta-taglibs, incidentally). It's something I aim to help solve the old-fashioned way. > * I no longer care about duplication and wheel reinvention (it will happen > anyway) Yep, to a degree. Though without a simultaneous commitment to document the resulting forks/duplications and preferably cull the old code, then Jon's worst predictions will come true and we can kiss Jakarta goodbye now. > > You can say all you want that you predicted how commons would turn out - > > but lack of participation by people such as yourself have made such > > predictions self fulfilling prophesies. > > Heres what sucks about commons; > > 1. People who are not associated with codebase nor ever contributed to it get > voting rights over codebase (who needs meritocracy anyways) Has that turned out to be a problem in practice? Say if you think so, and we can propose a modification to the charter: "The votes of those who haven't committed to a project are non-binding". > 2. Stable packages still have to go via sandbox and go through that whole > painful voting process (yet more non-contributors getting votes over codebase) > 3. Im not a committer You are. 'donaldp' listed for jakarta-commons and jakarta-commons-sandbox. --Jeff > Change (1) and I will migrate the majority of excaalibur across in time (and > bitch and moan till (2)/(3) is changed). Change (1), (2) and (3) and I will > move stuff across tomorrow (though still take time to actually do releases). > > -- > Cheers, > > Pete > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > "Remember, your body is a temple; however, it's also your > dancehall and bowling alley" -- Dharma Montgomery > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
