[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > In other words: I'll vote +1 if the final proposal will explicitely allow
> > > projects to componentize and share their code, as Peter proposed (with
> > > the maintainers of the shared component becoming library commiters ).
> >
> > You mean something like:
> >
> > + Packages extracted from stable ASF products, and refactored by their
> > committers to current library standards, will also be accepted, along
> > with the original committers to the package.
>
> Yes.
>
> I would also like to ask for something like: if a project is using a
> component, and none of the project commiters are commiters for the
> component - the project as a whole should count as a commiter (
> i.e. should be able to request a temporary freeze, a tag, etc - so a
> "stable"/"predictible" version of the component can be included ).
> ( it that's not too much )
I'm sorry. I don't mean to be a stick in the mud, but I *just* don't
get it. I will try to be succinct.
* This breaks the conventional Jakarta model for no reason that has been
explicitly stated.
* This could result in a groady mess - if any 'regular Jakarta project'
can at any time for any reason start another 'library sub-project', then
there is *nothing* that compels people to work together.
* This last suggestion promotes a project using a component from the
role of user to a 'default committer status' with veto power, without
any required investment in the project itself ?
* This dilutes the potential for 'productizing' some of the things
present here in Jakarta into packaged, usable compoenents, since nothing
prevents 7 connection pools from being in existance.... I fear
duplication of effort again...
yadda, yadda, yadda...
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
