On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 22:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jamie McCrindle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 23/07/2003 10:47:38 
> PM:
> 
> > apologies,
> > 
> > it seems i have overstepped my bounds, this was meant to be a followup 
> to a
> > mailing list discussion about standardising the POM that dion challenged 
> me
> > to do something about. this probably wasn't what he meant...
> Yes, it was. But I don't think you've overstepped your bounds. Anyone 
> should be able to talk to anyone else about Maven regardless of whether 
> it's in the context of a JSR or not.

No, it is not if it in any way represents Maven. I doubt the JSR fellow
gave a rat's ass about Maven anyway. Discussion is one thing, of course
there isn't a problem with that, but approaching a JSR lead as even
vaguely representing the interests of Maven I don't think is right.

> There was a discussion up here that Jason obviously missed.
>  
> > i'll try but it's just so good i just feel like i want to tell everyone.
> ;-)
> 
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Blog:      http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/
-- 
jvz.

Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://tambora.zenplex.org

In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
  
  -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society


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

Reply via email to