Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-13 Thread Martin Stricker
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > This is also why I don't like the idea of 'xml-tools': it's too > general. > 'commons' is appropriate for stuff that are so common that could be > placed in almost any other project. Sort of common denominator between > projects. > > This is what I'd like to have. I do

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-13 Thread Martin Stricker
Tom Bradford wrote: > > Martin Stricker wrote: > > A repository of XML and XSL tools, maybe called "xml-tools", should > > be kept separate from xml-commons. I see xml-commons as a > > inter-xml.apache.org project, and a tool collection definitely would > > target more on users than on xml.apache.

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-13 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi
Martin Stricker wrote: > > Shane Curcuru wrote: > > > Let's work on this discussion for a bit and get more participants. If > > needed we might cross-post once to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get more folks to > > come look over here (I was impressed you all actually subscribed! I > > thought it was sti

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-13 Thread Tom Bradford
Martin Stricker wrote: > A repository of XML and XSL tools, maybe called "xml-tools", should be > kept separate from xml-commons. I see xml-commons as a > inter-xml.apache.org project, and a tool collection definitely would > target more on users than on xml.apache.org subprojects. And if > someth

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-12 Thread Jeff Turner
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 08:30:42AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (Apologies if this is a dup, mailer problems abound this week) > you Jeff Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > [jt]>> What needs to change? Do you see something specific? This > paragraph from xml-commons/README.html: > >

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-12 Thread Martin Stricker
Shane Curcuru wrote: > Let's work on this discussion for a bit and get more participants. If > needed we might cross-post once to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get more folks to > come look over here (I was impressed you all actually subscribed! I > thought it was still edwin and sam and me!) I'm glad th

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-12 Thread shane_curcuru
(Apologies if this is a dup, mailer problems abound this week) you Jeff Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote [jt]>> What needs to change? Do you see something specific? This paragraph from xml-commons/README.html: > New modules generally shouldn't go in until at least two separate > other

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-12 Thread Shane Curcuru
you Jeff Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote [jt]>> What needs to change? Do you see something specific? This paragraph from xml-commons/README.html: > New modules generally shouldn't go in until at least two separate > other projects express interest in using the module. I think this is

Re: xml-commons charter

2001-12-12 Thread Jeff Turner
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 07:37:14PM +1100, David Crossley wrote: > Jeff continued: > > Anyone in favour of officially making xml-commons' charter closer to > > jakarta-commons? > > What needs to change? Do you see something specific? This paragraph from xml-commons/R

xml-commons charter -Was: xml-commons-which: new Which utility to replace EnvironmentCheck; Gump update request

2001-12-12 Thread David Crossley
me is starting to increase, so future "new code" additions can be discussed. I gather that that is what you meant. Jeff continued: > Anyone in favour of officially making xml-commons' charter closer to > jakarta-commons? What needs to change? Do you see something specific?