On 8/29/01 10:22 AM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First my thoughts - should Alexandria look like it was going to go into a
> long term hibernation again, I would say yes. Otherwise - as long as it
> looks like there is a hope that Alexandria would subsume the functionally
> included by Gump, I would prefer it stay here.
I would like it to stay too, I think the inter-project build and continuous
integration ideas are ones that belong in alexandria.
> Josh's joining the project rekindles the hope that Alexandria will live on.
>
> Follow-on question: Victor has expressed an interest in maintaining his own
> project defintions.
Sorry, I don't know which Victor you're talking about :-)
> I'm inclined to put this to a vote, and indicate my
> support. This is related to the question above as the level of granularity
> for karma is at the cvs module level. Thoughts?
I think any project that wants to maintain their descriptor should be free
to do so. How about putting the descriptors themselves in a separate
repository and allow access to anyone on a project that requests it?
So we could put the descriptors, dtd, xdocs for the descriptors and possibly
the object model in a separate repository and gump/maven/antgump so that any
tool can utilize what's where.
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
