On 8/9/05, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 14:00 -0400, James Carman wrote: > > Some of the code in my new "syringe" project deals specifically with > > creating proxy objects (currently I support CGLIB and reflection-based > > proxies). It is generic enough to live on its own and useful enough that > > others might be interested in it. Does this sound like something that does > > belong in the sandbox? > > sounds like a useful component.
This seems like the most important part :) You're a committer James, so I'd say go for it. > one of the general issues with small and almost complete sandbox > components is that it's hard to build a community when there's not much > to be done. would need a period of concentrated effort together with > some support from existing committers to be able to promote it. (but > don't let this put you off...) Yup. In fact being 'complete' seems to be a problem with the general ASF concepts. Complete codebases will never develop a large development community, but the ASF can help them generate a large user community. Is this good/bad etc. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
