Why does chronology matter? There are many bits and pieces that were fully developed in Avalon before they were in the commons, and that does NOT matter either.
Commons and Avalon just have different targets: - Loose components for the commons; - Framework for Avalon. And which is better is a religious matter, we have people of both faiths and it is better to have two "temples" than a religious war. The focus should NOT be on "I did it first" or "I am the original and you are the plagiarist". The focus should be the opposite: Lets copy and learn what we can from each other so that both groups can reach their different targets as efficiently as possible. Leave the "I did it first" to the corporate politics. This is Open Source. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -----Original Message----- > From: Waldhoff, Rodney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 2:41 PM > To: ''Jakarta Commons Developers List' ' > Subject: RE: [pool] PROPOSAL: add collecting of statistics to pool > implementations > > > > I will certainly take a look at > > Avalon. So why is there a commons pool > > and commons dbcp if Avalon does the > > same and more? > > I think it's the "and more" part. > > I do notice that Avalon's org.apache.avalon.excalibur.pool.* has > existed for > about a month, according to CVS, so perhaps the question should be turned > the other way. > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
