Re: Code conventions

>>> It's only two little lines extra to include the {}'s, >> > Yeah, but those two lines will make my code run slower. >> > Don't you know? >> > The less space your source code takes, the less space >> your class file will take. >> And smaller classes run faster. >> > It must be true - 90% of peop

Re: Code conventions

On 1/8/02 6:12 PM, "Tim Vernum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It's only two little lines extra to include the {}'s, > > Yeah, but those two lines will make my code run slower. > > Don't you know? > > The less space your source code takes, the less space > your class file will take. > And small

Re: Volunteer Wanted

On 1/8/02 2:49 PM, "Jon Scott Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want to remove my name from this page: > > > > I nominate Paulo to put his name there instead so that he can start > contributing more than just being a pain in my ass. Is that

Re: Code conventions

On 1/8/02 8:53 AM, "Endre Stølsvik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > | My question is what are the consequences to forcing me to do #2 when #1 is > | perfectly acceptable throughout the professional world? > > That syntax is so bleedin' ugly that I

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 10:48:42AM -, Danny Angus wrote: > Jon wrote: > > > My opinion is that there are to many peers in the process and that is what > > is breaking Jakarta. This wasn't a problem until now. We are starting to > > explode under our own ever growing weight. > > I've been in

Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content)

On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 09:29:18PM +1100, Peter Donald wrote: ... > > To drive this point home, the subject line of this thread identifies > > exactly one such set of duplication - between Turbine and Struts. My > > nagging lead Berin to propose moving the Avalon collections code into > > commons

License change for new year ?

I have 2 questions : 1/ Now that we are in 2002, do we need to change the text in all our license files to be : "Copyright (c) 1999-2002 The Apache Software Foundation" instead of "Copyright (c) 1999-2001 The Apache Software Foundation" ? 2/ Some license files only have "Copyright (c) 1999 The A

I'm tired of noise...

... so I go back to action. When Forrest powers xml.apache.org, you'll know about it. [I'll remain subscribed here, but don't expect much participation from me: I'd rather spend my time doing something more useful than crying about why this project isn't the project I dream about] Take care. -

RE: Code conventions

> -Original Message- > From: Tim Vernum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 5:12 PM > To: 'Jakarta General List' > Subject: RE: Code conventions > > > > It's only two little lines extra to include the {}'s, > > Yeah, but those two lines will make my code run slow

RE: Code conventions

> It's only two little lines extra to include the {}'s, Yeah, but those two lines will make my code run slower. Don't you know? The less space your source code takes, the less space your class file will take. And smaller classes run faster. It must be true - 90% of people I've worked with see

RE: Volunteer Wanted

I am also willing to volunteer. Please use the [EMAIL PROTECTED] account. Reading email is one of the things that I can do :) Scott Sanders > -Original Message- > From: Paulo Gaspar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 12:58 PM > To: Jakarta General List > Sub

RE: email issues..

I did reply to him. I told him that no License issues would prevent it, but to just let people know that he was doing it. Scott Sanders > -Original Message- > From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 9:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject

Re: Volunteer Wanted

Ted Husted wrote: > > Could you please add > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > to the list of people receiving [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail Done. - Sam Ruby -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Volunteer Wanted

apmail, Could you please add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the list of people receiving [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail Thanks! -- Ted husted ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Paulo Gaspar wrote: > > Ok Ted, > > At the moment I do not have enough time to assume the responsibility > for the whole thing but I am willing

RE: Volunteer Wanted

Ok Ted, At the moment I do not have enough time to assume the responsibility for the whole thing but I am willing to help. (I also do not have the time for flaming days like yesterday.) One more making some of the work must be of some help. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message-

RE: Volunteer Wanted

LOL I am willing to help but I will not stop being a pain in your ass when I find it necessary. Please remember that I do not systematicaly disagree with you. I just disagree when I can not agree. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL P

RE: Volunteer Wanted

I was actually thinking along those same lines. Tomcat 3.2.x is history and I haven't found another place to stick my fingers into the code, yet, so I wouldn't mind helping out a little bit with this. BUT, I have NO desire to hold such a position indefintely. I like the idea of a rotation. D

Re: Volunteer Wanted

The Webmaster box is a group account, and its easy to share. Just hit reply-all so the other "webmasters" know you replied. Peir used to help out, but he's off now. Another committer helps out now and again, but its mostly just me now. Which is fine, but I thought I would float the offer since it

Re: Volunteer Wanted

First, the page is outdated, Java Apache is not Jakarta. Second, acting as a receptionist at desk with a million visitors a day is not what I call a dream job. The task should left to one person but shared on a rotational basis. I am willing to be the first and take over for *one* month. Any

Re: Volunteer Wanted

on 1/8/02 11:57 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd say it should be the [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good idea. Done. > and if anyone, including Paulo, want to help out with the Webmaster > emails, that would be great. Maybe you will get lucky and get a volunteer. -jon -- To unsubscribe

Re: FW: email issues..

Eitan, All of the Jakarata source code and documenmtation is subject to the Apache Software License. http://apache.org/LICENSE So long as you follow the terms of those license, no additional notice is required. Any additional non-technical questions concerning the Apache Jakarta Project may

Re: Volunteer Wanted

I'd say it should be the [EMAIL PROTECTED] and if anyone, including Paulo, want to help out with the Webmaster emails, that would be great. Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > > I want to remove my name from this page: > > > > I nominate Paulo to put

Volunteer Wanted

I want to remove my name from this page: I nominate Paulo to put his name there instead so that he can start contributing more than just being a pain in my ass. Is that cool? -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For ad

RE: Jakarta code search engine? (Re: crushed)

> My guess then is that you have not read down the page far enough then. No > demands required. Wrong guess. =;o) I am noisy but not a committer in any Apache projects. Just posted a few patches on a couple of projects. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: Sam Ruby [ma

Re: Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content)

Paul Hammont wrote: > > There is some romance to extending the 'honor system' to the whole of > Jakarta. When we became committers we all treaded tentatively until > we'd fully earned the respect of the seasoned veterans in the project in > question. An 'open' Jakarta would be nice, but even wit

RE: Jakarta code search engine? (Re: crushed)

Paulo Gaspar wrote: > > I was not demanding karma, just stating what I thought were obstacles. > > Now I have some clues and it looks like I can help even without karma. > =:o) My guess then is that you have not read down the page far enough then. No demands required. - Sam Ruby -- To unsubsc

Re: Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons ValidatorPackaging/Content)

on 1/8/02 5:17 AM, "Jeff Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yep, to a degree. Though without a simultaneous commitment to document > the resulting forks/duplications and preferably cull the old code, then > Jon's worst predictions will come true and we can kiss Jakarta goodbye > now. That isn

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

on 1/8/02 3:13 AM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > so would collaboration on a web framework > > Pete This happened a long time ago (May 2000) on the PMC list: When Craig originally proposed Struts, I -1'd it. He assured me that he would be willing to collaborate together on Turbin

FW: email issues..

Someone want to reply to this person directly? -jon -- Forwarded Message From: "Eitan Suez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 08:43:09 -0600 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: email issues.. hi, i suspect that a recent attempt to block out spam on my mail server might have inadve

Re: Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content)

Sam, >I have quietly stated several times that I would prefer that a Jakarta >committer is a Jakarta committer. Gaging by the response I got each time, >I figured that then was not the time to push the issue. > There is some romance to extending the 'honor system' to the whole of Jakarta. Whe

Re: Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content)

Ted Husted wrote: > > As it stands, both are simply subprojects, and so a Commons committer is > a Commons committer. Ditto for Taglibs. It is also fair to point out that an Avalon committer is a committer to the framework itself as well as to testlet, logkit, phoenix, cornerstone, excalibur, and

Re: Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content)

Jeff Turner wrote: > Has that turned out to be a problem in practice? Say if you think so, > and we can propose a modification to the charter: "The votes of those > who haven't committed to a project are non-binding". That would be a matter to be discussed on the Commons (and/or Tablibs) lists.,

RE: Jakarta code search engine? (Re: crushed)

I was not demanding karma, just stating what I thought were obstacles. Now I have some clues and it looks like I can help even without karma. =:o) Have fun, Paulo > -Original Message- > From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 11:54 AM > > Paulo Gasp

RE: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

Turbine and Avalon serve very distinct purposes, uses and users. They just have a load of components trying to do the same thing. Those could be shared and unified by placing them in the commons. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED

RE: crushed

> Look at TC3 vs TC4 - I subscribed about a year ago to their dev > list and the > relationships between the two groups were less than good and a few people > were trying to make the division even greater .. apparently now > all is good over there. Keep in mind (maybe not Peter but other rea

Re: Code conventions

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: | My question is what are the consequences to forcing me to do #2 when #1 is | perfectly acceptable throughout the professional world? That syntax is so bleedin' ugly that I would suspect you were a novice not knowing how to code.. ;) PROFESSIONALS

Avalon, Commons, once again (Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content)

On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 09:29:18PM +1100, Peter Donald wrote: ... > > To drive this point home, the subject line of this thread identifies > > exactly one such set of duplication - between Turbine and Struts. My > > nagging lead Berin to propose moving the Avalon collections code into > > commons

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

Danny Angus wrote: > In my experience the best compromise is often to fragment the community, > have lots of small groups where concensus will get the job done, and hang > these together, but as this is pretty much what we have here already I find > myself asking the question; what role do the PMC

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 03:04, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > on 1/7/02 2:45 AM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 21:33, Ceki Gulcu wrote: > >> Peter, > >> > >> So are you proposing to become a log4j committer? > > > > Would there be a point to that? > > > Exactly. Collabor

Re: crushed

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 09:02, Jeff Turner wrote: > I would encourage people (esp. Jon, Ceki, Peter) to read Linus' emails > on design: > > "The problem with "singlemindedness and strict control" (or "design") > is that it sure gets you from point A to point B in a much straighter > line, and wit

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 21:30, Sam Ruby wrote: > Paulo Gaspar wrote: > >> I do what I can at the pace I am able. > > > >Which is quite impressive. Especially considering that you probably have > >other duties and a live. > > Thanks. And I do have both. > > http://www.activestate.com/Corporate/People/T

Re: Not able to put classes in the class path

The best place to post a question like this is the Tomcat USER list. http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote: > > I have installed , tomcat 4.0.1, and i have added an context in the webapps.. > > but when i m trying to use the class files it is not picking up.., s

RE: Jakarta code search engine? (Re: crushed)

Paulo Gaspar wrote: > > No karma, no clue on how to change a Jakarta web page! > =:o/ > > But at least puting the URL on the list should be a couple of > minutes for someone who does know. karma follows clue, i.e., get a clue, and you get karma. A good place to start is by going to "http://jakar

Re: Not able to put classes in the class path

maybe you would be better served asking on the Tomcat-user mailing list On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 21:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have installed , tomcat 4.0.1, and i have added an context in the > webapps.. > > but when i m trying to use the class files it is not picking up.., saying > nopt found..

RE: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

Jon wrote: > My opinion is that there are to many peers in the process and that is what > is breaking Jakarta. This wasn't a problem until now. We are starting to > explode under our own ever growing weight. I've been involved in other organisations that tried, from best intentions, to have a

Not able to put classes in the class path

I have installed , tomcat 4.0.1, and i have added an context in the webapps.. but when i m trying to use the class files it is not picking up.., saying nopt found... i have put the class files in web-inf/classes pls help me... what to do... vikas

RE: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

Paulo Gaspar wrote: > >> I do what I can at the pace I am able. > >Which is quite impressive. Especially considering that you probably have >other duties and a live. Thanks. And I do have both. http://www.activestate.com/Corporate/People/Tech_Board.html#sam http://www.zend.com/zend/hof/sam.php

Re: crushed

Jeff Turner wrote: > > Incidentally, the other statement Craig made in that email sums it all > up for me: > >> The point from Jon that I *do* dismiss is his feeling that there >> should be one and only one implementation of any particular >> functionality -- "one size fits all" is a very rare phe

Re: crushed

Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > At the macro level you have to stand back a bit and let the > secretary spend 30 cents too much on the paperclips. +1 - Sam Ruby -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: crushed

Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > > A good one that Sam worked on > resolving fairly successfully is the one about Gump. Another issue which I > see as a failure is the failure of projects to communicate with each other. Thanks for the kind words. If you take a moment and read the first paragraph of te

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 01:40, Sam Ruby wrote: > Peter Donald wrote: > > > > > So are you proposing to become a log4j committer? > > > > > > > > Would there be a point to that? > > > > > > It depends on whether and how you want to contribute. > > > There still is a lot of work to do. Ceki > > > > And t

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 20:55, Peter Donald wrote: > The best way to describe it was something I think Craig said, something > like - it doesn't much matter if there is an existing project with same > aims, what matters is what committers are willing to commit to. err maybe it was Ted ;) -- Cheers,

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:36, Ceki Gülcü wrote: > The JBoss guys are very smart. Scott Stark is extremely high caliber. Mark > is no idiot either. Jboss is successful because it is so fucking good. From > where I stand, the other appservers are just copying JBoss. Where do you > think the MBean arch

Re: proposal for the jakarta startpage

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:29, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > I also will say I haven't seen community crosstalk between XML and Jakarta, > from the point of view as communities. I know there are individuals who > contribute greatly to both communities, and many of us here in Jakarta > depend on XML proj

Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 03:03, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > In this email, all I hear you doing is pointing fingers. It has nothing to do with that. I keep hearing you and other people say jakarta is broken. However as far as I can tell it is just talk whenever someone steps on your toes. You don't re