David Crossley wrote, On 24/06/2003 10.23:
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
Hmmm, if this is the case, that even Forrest committers has to have this kind of right.
[RT] Why Forrest is not/does not become a subproject of Cocoon while it's so heavily based on it?
Definitely something to consider, it makes a lot of sense.
It does make sense. The hiatus is because Forrest started before Cocoon even thought about sub-projects. Also Cocoon moved out of xml.apache.org to be a top-level project and left Forrest behind.
Actually IIRC Forresters were proposed with the opportunity but preferred to remain at Xml.Apache. Don't know if a proposal would have the same result now.
David, please bring this up on Forrest-dev to see what others think of this.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------