[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > Maybe I should propose *that* for a vote :
> > > >
> > > > Subject : [VOTE] Geir shuts up about his damn mini-Jakarta model
> > >
> > > +1 :-)
> >
> > That's that then.
>
> I doubt it :-)
I doubt it too, but I am gonna try :)
> Geir, I agree with you - but this debate takes too much time and we are
> moving in circles. No rule is cast in stone - commiters can make different
> decisions regarding the project organization later, after we have more
> data and we know how it works.
>From where I sit, this is simply the taglibs model without the
commonality of a single tying subject (tags) across projects. Weeks of
conversation to redo 'taglibs'. :)
Ted has almost convinced me to try and float what I am thinking as
clearly as possible (for me) as a vote to amend what we have. 'Almost'
because I see that everyone seems to be happy, so there is little point
other than generating more bits to store on mail-archive.com.
> > > Costin :
> > >
> > > Geir, I'm sure your DBCP will be ok in both models, and the result will be
> > > as "productised" as you want it to be. After all any component can become
> > > a real jakarta project ( like Ant did ) - and we can't usurp the right to
> > > create projects ( even "mini-projects" ) from the PMC.
> >
> > Geir:
> >
> > Huh? It's not that far off from the [supposed] charter of Avalon to be
> > a place for components for server development, and there is no notion of
> > usurpation there.
>
> It's a bit debatable - if the goals are as generic as "develop components
> for server" - i.e. a bit more generic than the goals of jakarta itself,
> and if the project commiters can vote on any component that will be
> included - than why do we need a PMC to vote on adding a new codebase ?
The stated goal is even more generic : "A Jakarta subproject to solely
create and maintain independent packages is proposed to accelerate and
guide this process."
'Packages' - Strictly reading the proposal, if your component has more
than one package, is it in violation of the charter? Why not call the
project 'Flatland', since the package spaces for components will have to
be flat.
;->
(I'm just kidding)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
