On Sun, 12 Mar 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 3/12/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Asking the question on commons-dev should initiate discussion with those
who care about Digester - ideally asking it here would too but they might
not be paying attention I guess. Waiting for every individual codebase to
individually decide to get active and discuss non-code issues is a
non-starter from the beginning.
Why?
Because some of them are so dead as to make that unlikely to happen.
For example, we just voted to move Commons Latka into dormancy - how can
we do that? Did the Latka community decide on that?
We started discussing it and the Latka community could have spoken up.
There's no difference here. The Jakarta community starts discussing, and
those who feel the most affected by something can speak up.
Even in the model where we only look to those with substantial commits to
a codebase - some of the inactive ones are going to be left behind and
will need someone to be suggesting a direction for them.
Why?
Unsure which this why is to, the first is the one above - inactive
projects will just sit and do nothing because there is nobody to do
anything. The second is that the Jakarta community is responsible for
these projects, even if they are not actively committing in those
projects; and so the Jakarta community needs to be discussing them.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
