On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Graham Leggett <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15 Feb 2010, at 3:40 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: > >>> Can you speak up and explain why it shouldn't? >> >> AFAICT you're the only one in the world that cares about it (whether >> or not that is true; there's been no discussion). > > Did you not see rpluem's response and my response to it? Did you not see > fuankg's addition to the Netware build? I count two people so far who cared > enough to contribute, and that's just in the last 24 hours. Why did you not > join these discussions?
I saw that. I did not equate that to an indication that those individuals had reflected on the module and agreed that it belonged in the base distribution. > > There is no greater disincentive to working on the httpd project than this > kind of response. Making it worse, instead of making a case yourself, you > simply solicit others to make your case for you. When a potential > contributor reads this thread and others like it, all they see is that their > contribution is not welcome here, they quietly unsubscribe and the httpd > project suffers as a result. The nature of my interest is to find out if multiple developers are interested in this module being part of the base distribution. Yes, that involves soliciting others. (Whether I asked them to make a case for the module or against it is another question.) > >> All I really care is that multiple developers think it is a good idea >> to include it in the base distribution. (If not, then I don't think >> it should be here.) > > I am confident that if multiple developers believe it shouldn't be, then > those multiple developers will speak for themselves. It is in extremely poor > taste to actively try to solicit developers to speak out against somebody's > contribution. Let the community speak for itself. We're talking about two different things. Finding a couple of other people that think inclusion is a good idea (EXTREMELY LOW BARRIER TO ENTRY) is much different than finding a couple of other people that think inclusion is not a good idea or otherwise will speak out against it (EXTREMELY HIGH BARRIER TO ENTRY).
