Re: [GUMP@lsd]: ws-axis/ws-axis failed

[robert burrell donkin]

sorry, if i came over too strongly. it was the point i was trying to 
emphasis (rather than take pot shots at anyone).

gump's certainly proved it's worth (once again) in this case. thanks 
for all the hard work that you (and the rest of the gump community) 
have put into raising gump back from the dead.

BTW gump now runs on that mandrake box (but not till completion, i 
still need some more libraries). hopefully i'll be able to sort out 
both logging but also beanutils, digester and struts this week.

(and then i'll hopefully be able to get back to help out on the stuff 
i'd promised to look at this week :(

- robert
On 18 May 2004, at 23:18, Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
Gump isn't just a build script, it is that plus the effects/outcomes 
of
communities trying to get/stay aligned. We can't expect folks to drop
what they are doing the second something comes up, it just doesn't 
work
that way in the OSS world. Much as I might think that the C-L folks
ought find
it easy to apply the patch (and perhaps should have done the fix a 
year
plus ago) I am not aware of the factors impacting that project, nor 
do I
wish to judge.
<sigh>
Hey, you must've missed me saying this. ;-)
    "I am not aware of the factors impacting that project, nor do I 
wish to
judge."

BTW: At time of writting the above I was under the impression it was 
binary
compatible. That has since been disproven. It might've been nice if a 
smooth
transition had been found in the last couple of years of 'pseudo
deprecation', but then again I return to :

    "I am not aware of the factors impacting that project, nor do I 
wish to
judge."

:-)
i'm not willing to apply a patch that makes common-logging 
incompatible
    [...]
i make no apologies for putting the needs of the downstream users of
commons-logging higher than the need to fix this problem hastily.
Good, 'cos if I had a vote I'd veto is also. Gump has no purpose in 
life
other than to try to help detect and allow smoothing of API 
discontinuities
prior to release, to reduce Jar Hell. Sure, the more Gump coverage we 
get,
the more we can detect (hence my desire to get back to Gumping C-L
dependencies) but users come first...

regards,
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]