On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 04:26 PM, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 04:20 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Monday, November 10, 2003 21:05:16 +0000 Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What I see and what I fear is having the control of the projects
which I
currently have being taken away and placed in the hands of people who
have
committed no code, have answered no user queries, don't use the
language
(Java) and have no sense of the complex component history and
personality
matrix of the commons community.
I think you're missing the fact that you'd (or any other sizable committers on the projects that would migrate over) be on the Apache Commons PMC if you were to bring a project here. So, you would be legally empowered to control the project.
The whole point is to *legally* and *ethically* return control to the
committers by having them on the PMC - not to have the power vested in
some remote bureaucratic entity like it is in Jakarta. -- justin
Why do you call it a 'remote, bureaucratic entity'? I would argue that
it logically can't be if the allegation that it does nothing is true :)
I assume the problem just goes away if each commons component has representation on the PMC?
Or similarly, if jakarta-commons were to become a top level project?
I guess that would work too. What I was trying to preserve though is the original 'community core' that j-c provided in jakarta. Maybe we don't need it anymore.
-- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
