On Thursday, September 18, 2003, at 07:16 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
<snip>
I don't buy that thread pools belong in Jakarta Commons. I'd believe that servlet containers belong in Jakarta Commons though. There's a qualitative difference. If people don't see that difference, then...
i think that people have misunderstood the point i was trying to make. i think that there is a difference but try defining a rational policy that quantifies where the line is drawn and you'll see the difficulties :)
to continue the example, is a thread pool contained within tomcat (for example) out of scope because thread pools are out of scope? or does it only become out-of-scope if it is factored out of tomcat so that it can be more easily maintained and reused?
qualitative differences just come down to opinion. arguments about opinion in the end can't really be settled rationally.
IMHO if the scope for jakarta (as intended by the board) cannot be quantified and the board (and the members) are unhappy with the way that scope has been quantified (by concensus) in jakarta then the i'd say that the only fair thing to do would be to stop complaining about jakarta (and its scope) and move all decisions about which projects and components are in scope for jakarta up a level. the board should go through and decide which can stay and which must go.
- robert
