"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote:
> No. This is the wierd model I didn't vote for - I think that the
> library committers agree that the DBCP project is needed, and the people
> proposing it are earnest in intent, have the skills to make pulling it
> off a possiblity, etc. Then, it's free from the control of the library
> committers as a group, and control belongs to the committers of that
> project, modulo remaining true to the charter of their project and
> Jakarta. (Hopefully lots of the library committers would want to join
> and help, but we all are busy and time is scarce.)
Up to the release. A release has to be subject to a vote of the entire
body of subproject committers, the same as any product. Otherwise, you
might as well propose your package to the PMC as a standalone
subproject.
I really think it's best if we work from the taglibs model. The
codebases in the taglibs subproject are as diverse as anything we might
propose. They are exposed through custom tags, but that's just a
wrapper. That a person is qualified to write a XSL tag doesn't make them
automatically qualified to write a JNDI tag, or BSF tag, or a JDBC tag.
It's really a very fair comparison.
The primary extensions I would like to make is to encourage an etiquette
where committers sign the package's status file before committing, and
to set up a combined user/dev list for each package.
-T.
