At 07:56 1/3/01 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>As I said in the previous message, I am concerned about the possible
*perception*
>of non-neutrality. Even if I believe that this is a non-issue, is that
going to
>be true for everyone? Is there a compelling reason that the component
library
>piece *should* be named Avalon, other than the fact that it was in the
original
>(admittedly failed) vision?
It is part of the obligation Apache has to it's projects. If you recall it
wasn't that long ago that Jon was complaining that Struts was reinventing
turbine stuff. Struts and turbine are much less overlapping than library
and Avalon. The only (good?) reason that has been identified for not using
Avalon is because it is "Not Invented Here". Now allowing this project
(which seems to be whats going to happen) establishes a precedent. Will
similar things happen in the future ? (Or only on projects that don't have
a PMC representative).
What happens when I decide I want to host another servlet engine under
jakarta - lets call it Glom. When asked why I don't work with tomcat my
reply is - it has a history and it's NIH. Do I pass go and collect $200? I
doubt it - because tomcat developers are on the PMC ;) So Glom either gets
integrated into tomcat as a revolution or is thrown out.
It is even more ironic that the this project was set up to establish
cooperation and sharing - interesting way of doin it ;)
>There is a very practical reason why I would dislike any potentially
temporary
>move -- package names. I never ever ever want to have to change them again.
So don't keep it at org.apache.agora.digester.
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
