Sam Ruby wrote:
The question is:
Is the working assumption that [EMAIL PROTECTED] will be a divided community, where "each person is working on their own stuff" -- a bunch of personal playgrounds, only loosely falling under some concept called "commons"?
Or is the working assumption being that committers to [EMAIL PROTECTED] form one community, with the assumption being that all participants are adults?
i believe that neither of these alternatives is fully descriptive, though i find both a bit .. eh.. suboptimally phrased. i believe there will be one community, with shared goals, but that there will be subcommunities focussed on the different aspects. and the presumption is that anyone who has commit access will behave responsibly.
I intentionally borrowed the phrasing of Greg in the first case, and Peter in the second case. Something I will do again [1]:
"there needs to be a more formal system in place to limit the damage that can be done. The best way to do that is to partition access to those who merit it."
Is the intent of Apache commons to set up such a partitioned community where a person who participates in one Apache commons subcommunity is not presumed to have merit in other Apache commons subcommunity?
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-dev&m=103694442418388&w=2
