on 6/24/03 7:19 AM Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > >>Jeff Turner wrote, On 24/06/2003 13.38: >> >> >>>As most of you probably saw, there's a thread on cocoon-dev suggesting >>>that Forrest ought to be a Cocoon subproject, with the >> >>consensus being it >> >>>"makes sense". >>> >>>AFAICT the only practical difference would be that Cocoon committers >>>would automatically become Forrest committers. Sounds fine to me. Can >>>we vote on these issues then? >>> >>>Vote 1: Cocoon committers automatically become Forrest committers >> >>+1 >> > > +1
+1 > >>>Vote 2: Forrest should become a subproject of Cocoon >>>(http://cocoon.apache.org/forrest) >> >>+1 >> > > +1 +1 > >></SNIP> >> >>PS: This makes me think that Linotype should have its own project rather >>than being just a block... >> > > I think some other current blocks are good candidates as subprojects but > I guess we are not ready for that now - I think, this fits a little bit > in the context of "real blocks". I agree with Carsten here, until we have a real deployment infrastructure, it would just create more harm than good to hyperfragment our blocks into their own projects. -- Stefano.
