[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 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 was hoping so, but it did appear direct.
> 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.
Yes, it was amazing. I was trying to stay out, but I see that the
biggest problem I was trying to solve *was* the notion of release -
having a place where people who *want* to release 'small things' can
live.
The sharing / collaboration is very good to have, and I think that it
could work just fine in parallel with 'released things'.
> 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.
Well, in some ways, that's a practical interpretation. But I think I do
understand the purpose clearly - I just see that formalizing the bit
about release, when a group of 'collaborators' decides they want to
release and support, is an important one. And that 'sponsored by a
Jakarta project' phrase could be interpreted to really change the
meaning of commons - while it would get people from different projects
collaborating, they would still have these 'hidden' gems that no one
could easily find and use, other than the Jakarta projects involved.
> >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.
But the notion of 'release' in such an environment is sort of tenuous,
right? If you moved out to a separate entity once ready, then it's even
easier for more people to share and use, not just the dparticipating
projects. They would still 'own' it.... it's just easier for others to
find and use.
Or at least that is my interpretation and belief.
> I'm sorry if I over reacted, but today's mail was very painful for me, and
> very unexpected.
No worries. I have to say I enjoyed riffing on what +1 could mean...
:)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
