Greg, Understood, and I think we are in general agreement, but things have gone off topic a little.
Hopefully you understand I am not proposing to fork anything merely for the sake of it. Any decision to a fork would only come about after the collaboration process 'rejected' the proposal, but when the functionality might yet benefit (a potentially small number) of others. If nobody cares about it, then it will remain in my private library. If someone cares, and I have time, I am happy to make it public. I originally asked if anyone was interested in the idea, but didn't attempt to force it upon anyone. I personally see value in the flexibility, functionality and simplicity of it (subjective terms, obviously) and was simply asking if anyone else could find a use for it. My feelings won't be hurt if the reception is just 'the sound of crickets, and tumbleweeds rolling by!' :) If I do proceed with this publicly in any way, its purpose, future goals, dangers, possibilities etc will all be prominently stated. As will the fact that it is based upon the sterling work of the Pivot contributors. It would never be presented as anything other than a way to process BXML slightly differently, from the 'official' way. However, even saying that makes it sound like a much bigger deal than anything I envisioned. I was thinking of < 10 core classes bundled into a jar and potentially lots of reuseable 'Transformable' implementations hosted somewhere. Certainly not a move to steal Pivot's thunder in any way. Chris On 9 July 2011 01:21, Greg Brown <gk_br...@verizon.net> wrote: > By the way, I don't mean to be preachy - I'm just saying that, if you think > you have a good idea, then put it out there and let it get tossed around a > bit. From my experience, that's the best way to reach a solution that > everyone is happy with. > > On Jul 8, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Greg Brown wrote: > >> What I'm trying to say is that, even though collaboration may be difficult >> at times, it generally produces a better result than the efforts of multiple >> individuals working independently. Just because I may not agree with all >> aspects of a change you propose (or vice versa) does not mean that I don't >> see any value in it. By discussing a proposed change in the open, that value >> can generally be drawn out. In my opinion, choosing to fork rather than >> collaborate is simply counter to the spirit of the ASF. >> >> G >> > >
