On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 18:14, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >>>Moving out of Avalon would remove many of the constraints that are > >>>present and would make it much easier for phoenix to attract a larger > >>>community in such an environment. > >> > >>Uh, yeah, route around constraints instead of working toward creating > >>consensus and fix them. > > > > Actually the constraints come from above - the board (or at least Sam?) > > wants to see that projects flatten permissions and privs. So when you > > nominate someone for the work they are doing on phoenix then you nominate > > for the whole of Avalon and vice versa. > > No, I was talking about the fact that you seem to see this community as > a constraint to phoenix evolution and you want to route around that > instead of constructively build consensus.
I would love to see Avalon migrate to something better. The problem is that "better" is hard to define, existing projects (mainly cocoon) will have to change in most definitions of better and worst yet - egos. If you remember back to when I first started messing around with Avalon. The very first flame fest that I was involved in - my initial reaction was what? Thats right I suggested that we remove all @author tags from the source files. Why? Because the flame was caused purely because of ego. The technical better soution was adopted but only after the author whos code was replaced had ranted on. Who was that again? I have said it before and likely will say it again. Removing the author tags in framework at least would go a good way to reducing the ego induced silliness that seems rampant here. It was here from way back before I was involved. > How can one possibly like phoenix and hate avalon? Q: How can you like Cocoon and hate avalon? Q: How can you like Phoenix and hate avalon? A: Features useful - approach may not be. Not everyone is as academically orientated as you are and many people have a much more pragmatic approach to things. Thus the overly complex farting around that sometimes is required due to Avalons "flexability" is not appreciated. Low coupling, rapid development and ease of refactoring are often higher priorities for some. I recognize the value of Avalon over the long term life of a project but I also am aware that in some circumstances there are better aprroaches. > I don't want Phoenix to become another Avalon: I would like you to work > with us instead of against us. Thats funny - I thought that we were part of the us and you were one of the them. Either way I always thought that one of the best incentives to not fork was the ability to fork on a whim. That pretty much holds true for majority of cases I have seen. What leads you to believe differently? > > Let me remind you that you have not been active in a constructive way in > > Avalon for a long time. > > True and that was a mistake and I take the blame for that. I left Avalon > as a single project and when I came back there were *tons* of internally > fragmented pieces, including a logging toolkit, for &deity;'s sake! Well - you were the person who got me to move logkit into Avalon - it was in about 9 months before you left. The rest of it was partially done so that we were capable of delivering a release for Cocoon - IIRC we asked your opinion and you did not have anything bad to say about it then. > But this doesn't mean that now that I have more energy to invest on > this, I can't go back and try to "fix" things that appear totally broken > to me. As long as you respect what the rest of us believe then that is fine. Last time you came back to "fix" things, several people commented on how very JDD you had become. If you have come back to help improve the Avalon project then you are welcome - however if you have come back to fix all the problems that occured since you have left ... -- Cheers, Peter Donald *------------------------------------------------* | Trying is the first step to failure. | | So never try, Lisa - Homer Jay Simpson | *------------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
