Jason,
I am the one who raised the issue about Ant and Maven. I have made the
observation before. Dion said that it was the Ant PMC that was in the way.
Greg Stein replied that the Ant charter could be changed if that was the
only issue. You jumped down Greg's throat about the Board taking away
project self-determination. Sam replied that you had misinterpreted Greg's
comments. So you jumped down Sam's throat with what appears to be an
assault based upon prior context, because it certainly cannot be inferred
from what Sam said to you this morning.
Since I am the one who asked why Ant and Maven aren't related projects under
a PMC, you might was well yell at me for having the temerity to ask a rather
obvious question. But for all of your railing this morning, you never
actually answered the question.
What you did say was that: "I'll qualify this as I'm didn't intend to lump
Ant in here. I'm specifically talking about Gump, Centipede and Ruper which
as far as I'm concerned are an embarassment and Maven developers should not
be forced into working with bodies of code we feel are not very good."
Well, I didn't ask about Gump, Centipede or Ruper. I asked about Ant and
Maven. Start there. And as far as I'm concerned, if Build Project X sucks
(a logical antecedent for the sake of discussion), then an Ant/Maven PMC
could resolve that by correction/replacement as part of their on-going
development.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
