Glen et al,
My impression was that the phrase "migration and rationalization of the Batik and FOP Apache XML subprojects" refers to the migration from XML subprojects to XML Graphics subprojects. If the migration does not happen, what code will come under the XML Graphics umbrella? "Rationalization" may be something that can be postponed, but it does not seem to me that "migration" can be, if the XML Graphics project is to have any kind of reality. Perhaps we should find out from infrastructure@ exactly what is involved in a minimal "migration". For example, at the moment, the repository for FOP is xml-fop. It may be perfectly feasible to leave this intact, and make a few changes to the web pages indicating that the xml-fop repository now belongs to the FOP subproject of XML Graphics, and presto! migration complete, and the initial requirements of that resolution of the proposal are fulfilled.
Would it be OK then, to just drop the "and rationalization" from the resolution?
Peter
Glen Mazza wrote:
Yes, some code movement may very well be indicated, and I'm not ruling anything out. It's just that the charter should not be *mandating* such movement. We should take up this issue later on a class-by-class, package-by-package basis.
Glen
--- Thomas DeWeese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In other words the issue of migrating/rationalizing the code base is an excellent topic of discussion, once the PMC is formed. It doesn't have to be (and actually probably shouldn't be) part of the charter of the PMC.
-- Peter B. West <http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/resume.html>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
