On 2/4/02 6:43 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Inline... > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:28 AM >> >> We have the ability to affect change on this thing I believe is a problem. >> (One answer is "It's not a problem" I suppose...) >> >> The only answers I hear are "Things are fine" or "Tomorrow..." or "That's >> prevented by the rules". > > And IT IS prevented by the rules. A lot of people would veto the kind > of nastiness you are afraid of and the mess would be rolled back. Well it isn't actually, but I've been told to shut up, so I'll leave it here. > >> I know it's hypothetical, and has been ruled to be a waste of >> bandwidth, but >> what about the "log4j crew" vs "logkit crew" in the the "everyone gets to >> vote irrespective of contribution" model? > > AFAIK only some of us are proposing such model to be applied to the > whole Jakarta (and I am NOT one of them). > > Besides, a lot of people (including me) would prefer to have BOTH > LogKit and Log4J and veto such mess. I want both too. > I also think that both logging teams, although not always very wise, > are still much wiser than that. > I know. I have high regard for Ceki and Peter. That's why its hypothetical. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting You're going to end up getting pissed at your software anyway, so you might as well not pay for it. Try Open Source. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
