--- Alan Gerhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think you might be missing the big picture.
> James
> > is already (I stand corrected, it's not dead) in
> idle
> > mode. My feeling is that new development cannot
> > happen with the current committers not committing
> > anything. Unless they let other (active)
> developers
> > in, they are nothing more than
> sourceforge-squatters.
> > Case study: FreeBSD vs. DragonflyBSD.
>
> No, I see your big picture ... sadly you do not see
> mine.
> James is not idle - there is a tremendous amount of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Give me a break. _Some_ work at best. I think people
are simply busy/burned-out. When was the last
non-beta James release? More and more people having
to resort to their own repositories? Is this the ASF
model?
> work going on.
> You need to understand this is not a question of
> letting in active
> developers,
> but letting developers who actively support James
> and share it's vision
> to contribute time and effort to promote and propel
> James down it's path.
>
> --> Neither do lengthy discussions pitting one
> --> technology against another.
> > Could you please elaborate? If you are defending
> the
> > Avalon beast, I have nothing to add. Except, that
> > having to rely on deprecated components is not a
> good
> > thing and does tarnish James's image.
>
> The short version is that I see no benefit in
> discussing which new
> technology to use to replace part or all of James'
> interfaces and my remark
> was geared to that
> instead of attaching Avalon for example.
You mean Avalon is fine and dandy, or that the
problems with Avalon are fairly low priority?
> > Yeah, but the growth part ain't happening and it
> won't
> > without active players.
>
> James won't grow without players actively supporting
> James.
> My position is that writing code is a small part of
> what James needs.
> All code that we accept into James needs to be what
> James needs (Break/Fix),
> what James is developing (new features), and what
> James is moving into.
>
> I believe that today's Open Source is no longer the
> free willy-nilly that
> one was,
> but is now a more structured project with
> deliverables and responsibilities,
> and because of this,
> we need to exercise more restraint and actively
> reject brilliant work if it
> does not fit into
> the James Vision or ASF model.
How do you make something structured with volunteered
time? Particularly, when the quantity itself is in
very short supply?
BTW, what the heck is the James Vision or ASF model.
Besides your personal interpretation???
Gabor
Gabor Kincses
Running Mandrake Linux 10.0
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
