Glenn Nielsen wrote:
Bill Barker wrote:

<ballot>
[ ] +1 I Support the idea of a branch, and will help maintain it.
[ ] +0 I like the idea
[ ] -0 I don't like the idea
[X] -1 I'm against the idea of branching
</ballot>

Before branching and having to maintain patches in two branches,
why not try to fix the builds and/or change the implemenation of the
additional JMX support so that it can be built optionally.
Sorry, but this is not possible, and I will *not* include these changes in 4.1.x, at least not for now.

I am a huge +1 on using JMX to capture runtime monitoring data,
but -1 on having two branches to maintain in j-t-c.
I think this is a majority vote. Besides, it was agreed on before that a branch would be created in j-t-c.

Remy


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to