On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 01:25:39PM -0800, Rodney Waldhoff wrote: > I'd be careful with this line of thinking. We've heard from > perhaps 4 jakarta-commons folks on this thread, there are 70 some > committers listed in the avail file for jaakrta-commons.
As a group, A-C doesn't know what is right/wrong thinking, so it is good to have J-C people here to help. >... > rare (these two cases cover it IIRC). It does not seem that the > jakarta-commons community is clamoring for finer subdivisions. Okay... it seemed that somebody said otherwise. It obviously isn't clear. > On a broader note, I'd strongly recommend that this group make an effort > to engage the larger jakarta-commons community sooner rather than later. > Coming to j-c with a pre-defined plan of "here's where your code and > community is going to be placed within apache-commons" isn't going to be > any more welcome (or effective) now Sure. But a proposal has to start somewhere. How to *present* that is a different story, and your point is entirely valid. I think the bigger question is how to engage the J-C community. My opinion is that the people are are already in it, such as yourself, would be able to do that. > than the announcement made a year or > so ago stating "the board has created apache-commons to replace > jakarta-commons". Absolute bullshit. Get your facts straight. That statement was *NEVER* made. Much care was taken to avoid exactly that. > Jakarta-Commons is a mature, diverse and successful > project. It would be a mistake to believe apache-commons has nothing to > learn from it. Certainly. I don't think anybody believes otherwise. I would also turn that around and say that some of the A-C people come from PMCs that have much stronger oversight than what J-C experiences today, and that *that* is something which J-C can learn about. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
