After a weekend without email a lot of things seems clear :-)
First, I believe we all have similar goals, and agree on most issues -
except some details. I think it is stupid to argue about them any more -
it's quite obvious that everyone is right in a certain context.
Everyone has an itch, and all of them are important - including the
"component repository", with "productized" components.
I had few concerns regarding the solution and how
"open" can it be - but we are reasonable people and I'm sure reasonable
decisions will be made, even if the rules don't state explicitely that
"duplication is permitted" ( my biggest concern ) and "jakarta commiters
should have a smaller burden to become involved".
The only (detail) I'm still woried about in the library project is the
fact that the goal is almost identical with what I think to be the goal
for Avalon. Maybe it would be a better idea to make avalon work and join
it instead of creating a new project ( assuming avalon people are open to
this ).
My arguments were based on a itch I have, as tomcat commiter. I'll send a
separate mail and a proposal - I no longer think it should be part of the
"library" project, since it would mean compromises on both sides and it's
better to do each one right, and I'll +1 the current library proposal, as
I think it is right ( for it's goal ).
That's it - I'll probably contribute on the testing and xml config
components, when work will start, and ( very likely ) on the build
infrastructure ( Sam - maybe it would be a good idea to have Gump itself
as a library component ).
I'll continue to work on componentize-ing tomcat and making sure
the existing components ( log, xml config, testing, etc) are useable and
replaceable as/with library components. And I'll try to get tomcat3 to use
the same conventions/doc/xml files as the library for it's components.
Costin
( I'll send 2 other separate mails - one about my itch, one
about versioning ).
