did you why Apache Tomcat dosn't run in Vista??

On 5/10/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 5/10/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/8/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [ ] +1 I support the proposal
> > [ ] +0 I don't care
> > [x] -1  I'm opposed to the proposal because...
> I do not feel the draft resolution adequately addresses several
> remarks made in the discussion thread.

I'm in agreement with Niall. I think both of the quotes below are
mine, so I'll respond to those.

> The resolution should address issues raised as to the scope of the PMC
> and the use of the commons namespace. Comments on the other thread
> included remarks like
> * "We'll do whatever the community wants to do. If someone proposes a
> Ruby library and we have a community interested in creating and
> supporting a Ruby library, then it would of course be strongly
> considered. "

Yep, I stand by this one. Look at Jakarta's resolution and what
Jakarta does now - it's clear that the community overrules the
resolution and I expect it's up to the board to complain if they feel
it's gone too far.

> and
> * "Multiple PMCs, one website. So we'd have Java Commons, Ruby
> Commons, BobsYourUncle Commons PMCs, and they'd all share a
> commons.apache.org website."

This one was definitely a random suggestion. If we reach a point of
impasse with another commons wanting to start, then I (with board hat
on) think the solution would be to have multiple PMCs and 1 website.
Or maybe that really means a portal and a site behind it. All
hypothetical though - XML Commons is dead, DB Commons never happened
and WS Commons is afaik not highly active. We do own the Commons space

> But, as it stands, the resolution implies that the proposed PMC will
> be excluded to Java and would own both the top-level "Commons" project
> name and the "commons.apache.org" namespace. Neither remark is
> addressed.

Yep. Personally I think that we don't need Java there. For two reasons:

1) It's community and day to day life that determines our scope, more
so than a resoltion.
2) It's (let's face it) an easier sell without Java in the text.

However the consensus was very clearly in favour of having Java in the


> Let the focus of this PMC remain on Java, but, in the Apache spirit of
> openness and collaboration, make way for other Apache Commons projects
> in other languages.

Sure - but let's discuss that then rather than now. Hypotheticals will
just keep us spinning emails out ad infinitum.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Enjoy your day!!


Reply via email to