Henri Yandell wrote:
-1. My reason for being against the idea is that it's a continuation of Jakarta as a set of communities without much overlap.
This proposal, as most others do simply represents reality - that Jakarta does contain sub-communities. Maybe the Apache board has trouble with that, but in the end most of us don't.
(Note: it was correct to ensure the true TLPs went to TLP, but what is left probably won't ever go TLP. And yet what is left is very definitely multiple communities.)
I would suggest that the concern shouldn't be with the presence or number of sub-communities, but instead the aim should be to offer something positive at the Jakarta level that pulls everyone within together. The carrot works better than the stick in OSS.
(Maybe Jakarta-level could have a single user ML for all Jakarta. Or even better focus on a Jakarta-wide forum system.)
I'm +1 to the idea of splitting Commons up into groupings - provided we don't break up the community.
This doesn't read right. A community comes together around the ML. And thats a good thing, not a bad thing. This proposal tries to take one large extended family and break it into two smaller more manageable units.
Perhaps you are thinking of a website only grouping? Well that adresses no real issues I can see. Its a shallow view on the problem. It leaves the underlying issues. One ML for all Jakarta won't work - its artificial.
And how is Jakarta Http Components, or Jakarta Web Components OK, but not jakarta Language Components?
Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
