More seriously, I like to believe that this is a country where Boston Commons and Yosemite National Park can coexist.
You keep bringing up this example, but I think it's fatally flawed.
I think your prevailing attitude leads towards separation when we should be trying to work together to achieve a common goal (no pun intended). We're all in the same boat. Regardless of where code lives, it will be owned by the ASF.
I think the ultimate question here is what organization best benefits the committers. Where there is not a strong tie to another Jakarta project, I firmly believe that the Jakarta Commons model causes exactly what Henri described:
The next step for these coders is to create more re-usable components. However, these were not created by a Jakarta project, and have no internal community. They don't feel very Apache-y.
I think we (as in the ASF) can do better. I think a project that is specifically tailored to this developer audience is required. One that cultivates new reusable libraries that people can use and improve.
And, I'd almost be certain that this Commons PMC would look very different than a lot of other PMCs. This ASF thing is all a grand experiment anyway. -- justin
