On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 09:21 -0500, Michael Becke wrote: > > This is certainly a more positive way of looking at things and a more > > appropriate way to describe goals of the project. However, without some > > contextual information (which we all know but others may not) the > > rationale behind certain motives may not be entirely clear. Can we keep > > the description of HttpClient 3.0 design limitations in some form? The > > goals page could contain some references to this page providing > > necessary context for the design decisions driving HttpComponents > > development? > > I hear you. This was one of my concerns in rewording this section. > Do you think we should create a new page that contains the criticism > of HttpClient 3.0 or is there some way we can better include that > content while still maintaining the "positive" wording of the goals > page? > > Mike >
My suggestion would be to keep the original page be, but do not provide a direct link to it from the front page. It would only be referenced by the Project Goals page and would at some point be completely removed when we no longer have to explain why we chose to rewrite HttpClient Oleg > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
