On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > > +1
> >
> > In other words - your development model is ok, nothing else should be
> > accepted.
Geir, apologies again - the reply was not intended to you but to the whole
thread...
I thought we reached a compromise after many weeks of emails and
I was happy that we were able to agree on something that would work for
all of us, and sudenly this morning we're back in a fury of emails and
with a proposal to change the wording - just a little bit.
I realize it is a small issue ( that can be resolved later or worked
around ), but most of the emails are making the sandbox equivalent with a
playground for untested code.
>From a place where projects can share code that is released, tested and
supported by one or more jakarta projects it suddenly became a place where
the components are not ready for release.
I'm sorry if I over reacted, but today's mail was very painful for me, and
very unexpected.
Costin
>
> Yes. That's *exactly* what I was attempting to convey as I was trying
> to catch up on this long email chain that we have to get right and get
> right soon.
>
> I got back from a long day away from email, was reading through and said
> to myself
>
> "Hmm. I want to say that only my development model is ok, and nothing
> else should be accepted, especially something from Costin. But what is
> the most efficient way to say that?"
>
> So I looked into the main Jarkarta site, and there it was :
>
> "Section 2.1 : Although normally used for voting, the +1 / -1 convention
> can both be used as shorthand to express feelings of support for an idea
> or to say 'My development model is ok, nothing else should be accepted'.
> "
>
> Of course, it doesn't say anything about the '...especially something
> from Costin' part, but hey - there's a PMC meeting tomorrow - I'll bring
> it up then...
>
> Sorry - it's almost 1 a.m., it's been a long week....
>
> ----
>
> Costin, come on... First, what I am thinking about here is the release
> model, not the development model. I am *for* having more than one
> approach for participation contained in Commons, if you recall.
>
> All I was saying is that I, as a singular individual with no more voting
> power than you, agree with the notion that for something qualified to be
> a Jakarta release, it should be moved out of the sandbox/agora/playpen
> and into a mini-project of it's own so it can be documented, supported,
> etc...
>
> I noticed there as another msg, so I will finish there...
>
> geir
>
>
