> > As with all open source development, when you "release" a project to
> > the community, you gain some things, like having a larger group of
> > developers test, document, fix, maintain and enhance that project (and
> > projects that may interoperate with it). But you also lose some
> > things, namely a bit of control over the evolution of that precise
> > code base. You're always free to try to push that evolution in one
> > direction or another, or (under the Apache license at least) to fork
> > it off and do whatever you want with your forked version of the code.
> > But you've lost the ability to directly control that evolution without
> > gaining some sort of consensus with the larger community. (You may
> > lead but they don't have to follow.)
>
> I don't like that log glue but I can/must live with it because I must
> admit I didn't follow the commons list so I didn't see the discussion
> about it. But from now on I'll follow it more closely.
Exact same. Note that I vetoed it, but my veto was ignored.
I finally agreed on it as a compromise. I'm not too happy about Rodney's
recent email, so I don't think I should have.
Remy
