Daniel brings up some good points. As for his objection to donating time
merely to support JGuru's ad revenue, I think that one misses. We're
trying to help log4j users. If someone else who helps us help log4j users
benefits, fine. It would be a symbiotic relationship. We would get more
publicity. But then I knew about Apache/Jakarta before I know about JGuru.
Log4j is getting quite popular without JGuru or anyone else (except Jakarta
of course).
I lament his point about repeated questions already answered in the FAQ.
But we get the same thing on the mailing list as it is now.
As for bypassing the Jakarta User Mailing list, I thought that was the
whole point: use the mailing list for development and JGuru for user
questions.
I agree that we should continue to include the FAQ with the distribution.
The entropy thing needs as much care on the mailing list as on the FAQ.
(See recent thread on "submissions falling through the cracks").
As long as we can back out in case things don't work and continue to own
the FAQ, I still don't see a problem with jGuru. Having seemed to have
shot down most of what Daniel said against jGuru, I don't have a strong
feeling either way. It the FAQ goes to jGuru, I'll work to support it.
Otherwise I'm content with things the way they are now with regard to FAQs.
- Paul
Paul Glezen
IT Specialist
Software Services
818 539 3321
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
