On Friday 25 March 2005 21:32, Simon Kitching wrote: > > So please don't let egos or politics screw up any chance of a solution > > to this mess. �Take something that works (UGLI sounds the best > > candidate), call it 'JCL 2.0', encourage everyone to use it, and we can > > all get on with life. > > Why are you accusing jcl developers of egos or politics? Where is your > evidence for any such thing? > > And if something doesn�t work but you never reported it, then why do you > think the project maintainers have any incentive to change things?
I am raising a warning flag of potential, unwanted, unnecessary escalation, a.k.a. flamewar. I am in the Jeff/Ceki corner, but don't want to point any fingers or make accusations of the JCL team. IMHO, JCL users have also been at fault to create the current situation. Now, let's tone down the 'opposing forces' and focus on the 'uniting spirits'. IMO, forging the know-how is essential. The JCL and Log4J gangs should unite, and forget who-is-who, and systematically work through the issues. Calling it JCL2.0 seems like a good market strategy, and hopefully a move to Apache LS would signal to the 'sceptics' (like myself) that JCL finally worked out the issues at hand and we (the sceptics) would no longer have the hard feelings we currently do. Cheers Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
