The statement upon rereading seems much stronger than intended. You
are correct, but I think the number of users that become contributers
is still far less than the number of users.
The only abandonment of the users was from the standpoint of
maintaining a legacy API. The users are free to update their code to
move with Lucene. They are the ones choosing to stay behind.
Even though I have contributed very little to Lucene, I still fight
for the developers ability to move it forward - since I do contribute
so little !!!!. It is up to me to update my code, or stay where I am
at. Now, if Lucene created a release every week that completely
changed the API and broke everything I wrote, while the old release
still had numerous serious bugs, I would quickly grow frustrated and
find a new library. That is not the case, and I don't think anyone
(especially me) is arguing for that.
On Jan 23, 2008, at 4:29 PM, Steven A Rowe wrote:
Hi robert,
On 01/23/2008 at 4:55 PM, robert engels wrote:
If the users are "just dropping in a new version" they are not
contributing to the community... I think just the opposite, they are
parasites.
I reject your characterization of passive users as "parasites"; I
suspect that you intend your casual use of this highly prejudicial
term to license wholesale abandonment of them as a valid constituency.
In my estimation, nearly every active contributor to open source
projects, including Lucene, was once a passive user. If you
discourage that pipeline, you cut off the supply of fresh
perspectives and future contributions. Please, let's not do that.
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
