On 4/30/02 5:09 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >>> one jakarta project ( with an aproved plan of release ) shouldn't >>> even need a vote to get into common proper and be released. >> >> Now, suppose I didn't like that outcome, and did a logger copy with some >> slight change, and called it TheLogger. According to your suggestion, I >> could incorporate in Velocity or make available as a component in Turbine, >> drop into sandbox, and keep moving it right through to Commons. > > Nothing can stop you from writing TheLogger - except other Turbine or > Velocity commiters who may -1 it. > > If the Turbine/Velocity community believes it is indeed needed and > benefical for them to create another logger - and this becomes a > part of the release, then I think it doesn't matter too much if you > release it as a component of Turbine or commons. Except I think that the committers of Commons should have the say in what happens in their community, rather than letting another subproject decide for them. > > And if you think other projects may be interested and use TheLogger, > I think it is perfectly justified to have it in commons. It won't > be called commons-logging ( you need another name ), and it won't > replace commons-logging. But Velocity can continue to use whatever > logger they choose. I think you are missing my point.... -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." - Benjamin Franklin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
