RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 1:08 PM > > On 2/4/02 7:08 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ... > > > > If you are sure that everybody else understood your POV and everybody > > is against, THEN i

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> > Have fun, > Paulo > > > -Original Message- > > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 12:40 PM > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Com

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

flame-free, and will keep to that. Thanks for the interesting discussion. geir > > > Have fun, > Paulo > >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 12:40 PM >> To: Jakarta Com

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

ent: Monday, February 04, 2002 12:40 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On 2/4/02 6:43 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Inline... > > > >> -Ori

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

depending on the mother project. Have fun, Paulo > -Original Message- > From: Aaron Smuts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 5:24 AM > To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List' > Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release &g

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/4/02 6:43 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Inline... > >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:28 AM >> >> We have the ability to affect change on this thing I believe is a problem. >> (One ans

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Inline... > -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:28 AM > > We have the ability to affect change on this thing I believe is a problem. > (One answer is "It's not a problem" I suppose...) > > The only answers I hear are

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Answer inline: > -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:02 AM > > On 2/3/02 7:56 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Answer inline: > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mail

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

+1 Paulo > -Original Message- > From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:25 AM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > Ted Husted wrote: > > > >

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Jakarta is a ASF project, along with several others. If you want the Commons to be a "mini-Jakarta", then propose it as another ASF project, same as Jakarta, XML, PHP, TCL, and the rest. It would then get its own PMC, and every component would be ~like~ a Jakarta subproject, as you keep saying the

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

It doesn't sound like there is a clear dependency chain among the projects. In JCS I've had a hell of a time trying to use utilities from Tomcat, since they seem to move around. Maybe I just shouldn't have been using them. Outside of Jakarta this would be fine, since I can control the release

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 10:53 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> On the other hand, if (hypothetically) Costin wanted to veto a change in >> axis that Glen Daniels (the most active committer at the present time) >> thought was important, I'm not sure

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Sam Ruby wrote: > On the other hand, if (hypothetically) Costin wanted to veto a change in > axis that Glen Daniels (the most active committer at the present time) > thought was important, I'm not sure what I would do. To add one more example - if a majority of axis commiters

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Sam Ruby wrote: > I have worked along side Costin on Tomcat 3.x.. To my knowledge he has no > specific expertise in SOAP or in the Axis code base. If he had a change he > wanted to make there, I would trust his judgement. Besides, I know the cvs > commands to back out a cha

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 10:25 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ted Husted wrote: >> >> As for myself, I'm in the camp that says the sky isn't falling. > > +1 > Why is this issue presented as a strawman of cataclysmic disruption, rather than a small adjustment towards further conformance to a ver

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 10:18 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: >> No - I think Jakarta is getting too big. But that's for another list. My >> problem with governance of commons is different. Very specific, and >> different. >> >> I hope commons grows to *hundreds* of

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 10:16 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Geir Magnusson wrote: >> >> Care to take that to the logical conclusion? >> >> PROPOSAL : Grant CVS read/write to anyone subscribed to the mail list. >> Make it automatic upon subscription to save root@ the time for configuration >> an

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Ted Husted wrote: > > As for myself, I'm in the camp that says the sky isn't falling. +1 - Sam Ruby -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > No - I think Jakarta is getting too big. But that's for another list. My > problem with governance of commons is different. Very specific, and > different. > > I hope commons grows to *hundreds* of well crafted, well documented, well > supported components. So tak

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Geir Magnusson wrote: > > Care to take that to the logical conclusion? > > PROPOSAL : Grant CVS read/write to anyone subscribed to the mail list. > Make it automatic upon subscription to save root@ the time for configuration > and the community time for voting. After all, any list subscriber is a

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 7:56 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Answer inline: > >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 11:11 PM >> >> On 2/3/02 4:21 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Amazing wor

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

es more and more often. geir > > Have fun, > Paulo > >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 8:18 PM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE]

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 3:29 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: >> Without resorting to legal reasons, and actually going into the >> hypothetical, why wouldn't we let Bryan into the sandbox to pursue Simper >> with other Commons committers? > > I don't hand out the karm

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

game should change. =;o) Have fun, Paulo > -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 8:18 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > O

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

ommons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > > I think it comes to trusting someone in a specific domain of > expertise. For > > other jakarta projects (generally speaking) it is my impr

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > Without resorting to legal reasons, and actually going into the > hypothetical, why wouldn't we let Bryan into the sandbox to pursue Simper > with other Commons committers? I don't hand out the karma around here, so it's not my decision. If someone asked me to vote

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 3:00 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: >> I think it comes to trusting someone in a specific domain of expertise. For >> other jakarta projects (generally speaking) it is my impression that people >> are committers because of expertise in areas r

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > I think it comes to trusting someone in a specific domain of expertise. For > other jakarta projects (generally speaking) it is my impression that people > are committers because of expertise in areas related to that specific > project and are trusted by others *in t

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/3/02 2:25 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Geir Magnusson wrote: >> >> Costin, I trust your work on the servlet container. >> >> That doesn't mean I trust you with everything. To be frank, I do trust you >> with most things you choose to participate in, but it's not because you

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Geir Magnusson wrote: > > Costin, I trust your work on the servlet container. > > That doesn't mean I trust you with everything. To be frank, I do trust you > with most things you choose to participate in, but it's not because you are > a 'Jakarta Committer'. It's because I know you and your wor

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

ever does another release? geir > > Have fun, > Paulo > >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 7:54 PM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

sson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 7:54 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On 2/3/02 1:39 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It is not fo

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/2/02 6:09 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (To Peter : ) > > You are saying simple users ( even if those simple users are jakarta > commiters ) can't vote. If you look back at what happened to start this thread, *Peter* was *told* that his vote didn't matter because he w

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

y 03, 2002 11:08 AM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release >> >> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Paulo Gaspar wrote: >> >>> I am already a convert. If you keep writing this kind

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

arta Commons Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Paulo Gaspar wrote: > > > I am already a convert. If you keep writing this kind of stuff I will > > soon become an enthusiast of this line of r

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Paulo Gaspar wrote: > I am already a convert. If you keep writing this kind of stuff I will > soon become an enthusiast of this line of reasoning and start preaching > to the masses too. > =;o) Well, I'm already sorry about that... I have a lot of other things to do, but Pete

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

I am already a convert. If you keep writing this kind of stuff I will soon become an enthusiast of this line of reasoning and start preaching to the masses too. =;o) Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, Februar

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > You mean users can become developers by participating? > > > > That's how open source works, Peter ! > > Almost all developers around here are users who choosed to participate. > > Which is precisely my point - thanks for demonstrating it ;) > > Choos

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

hould not be allowed to vote on a commons project. He was talking about that all the time Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 3:11 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Su

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/2/02 6:50 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The vote was on a release, and the vote passed. > > An issue regarding attribution was resolved. The committers are still > honing some fine points, but the package is on it's way. > > Apparently, Peter feels that "I have been stymied

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

The vote was on a release, and the vote passed. An issue regarding attribution was resolved. The committers are still honing some fine points, but the package is on it's way. Apparently, Peter feels that "I have been stymied by "committers" who vetoed things but had never done anywork and nev

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 11:13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > Separate voting rights not commit rights. Only people who show commitment > > to a product should be able to have binding votes on it. > > _Using_ a commons component in another jakarta project is a hu

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Yikes. A mountain of email. I've not seen any discussion about how Peter's -1 should be taken? It seems that in a normal comitter only project, the -1 would lead to discussion, if still not resolved it would lead to argument and then to breaking away and forking etc. However Peter is not activel

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 7:13 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter Donald wrote: >> >> Funnily enough Costins model == Peters model. Go back and read stuff - I >> believe CVS should be open across the board as does Sam IIRC - Jon was >> very opposed to it though so it didn't get done ;) > >> Sepa

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 7:05 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The original idea of adding your name to the STATUS files was just to > help keep track of who was working on what. Not because of voting or > anything, but so people who know who to ping without digging through the > combined CVS or GR

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

But it is important to note that a Committers veto is not an absolute. If a Committer were insane, there can be (and has been) a redress of grievances at an executive level. The voting process does not need to be foolproof; it just needs to get us through the day, keep good code flowing into the

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > Separate voting rights not commit rights. Only people who show commitment to > > a product should be able to have binding votes on it. > > _Using_ a commons component in another jakarta project is a huge > commitment to that component. The rule is th

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

[Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > Peter Donald wrote: > > > > Funnily enough Costins model == Peters model. Go back and > read stuff - > > I believe CVS should be open across the board as does Sam > IIRC - Jon > > was very opposed to it though

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 11:13, Sam Ruby wrote: > Peter Donald wrote: > > Funnily enough Costins model == Peters model. Go back and read stuff - I > > believe CVS should be open across the board as does Sam IIRC - Jon was > > very opposed to it though so it didn't get done ;) > > > > Separate voting rig

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

rs List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > Separate voting rights not commit rights. Only people who show > commitment to > > a product should be able to have binding votes on it. > > _

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Peter Donald wrote: > > Funnily enough Costins model == Peters model. Go back and read stuff - I > believe CVS should be open across the board as does Sam IIRC - Jon was > very opposed to it though so it didn't get done ;) > Separate voting rights not commit rights. Only people who show commitmen

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > Separate voting rights not commit rights. Only people who show commitment to > a product should be able to have binding votes on it. _Using_ a commons component in another jakarta project is a huge commitment to that component. The rule is there to make

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

gt; Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > The original idea of adding your name to the STATUS files was just to > help keep track of who was working on what. Not because of voting or > anything, but so people who know who to ping without digging through the

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

- Original Message - From: "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 5:35 PM Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 10:16

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Ah, I understand now. Then lets keep the status file. > -Original Message- > From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 4:06 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > >

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

The original idea of adding your name to the STATUS files was just to help keep track of who was working on what. Not because of voting or anything, but so people who know who to ping without digging through the combined CVS or GREPing for @authors. But the same thing could be accomplished by do

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Many reusable components are only tied to the framework by a couple of interfaces and would work without the framework being active. (I grabbed a lot of stuff from Avalon.) The levels of architecture & design are quite high at Avalon. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From:

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 10:41, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > On 2/1/02 6:34 PM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 09:31, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >>> Avalon is no more or less coherent than Commons. > >> > >> Really - you are saying that the parts of Avalon have no organ

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Ted Husted wrote: > > The true fact is the PMC Chair has total authority over the Jakareta > codebase, and can drop anyone's access anytime. The votes are an > important courtesy, like a jury trial, but the ASF can set aside our > verdict any time they choose. Technically true. But in practice i

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 3:42 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On 2/1/02 6:34 PM, "Peter Dona

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 6:34 PM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 09:31, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >>> Avalon is no more or less coherent than Commons. >> >> Really - you are saying that the parts of Avalon have no organized >> relationship? Or that the relationships are *exactly

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

; -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 3:32 PM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release >> >> >> On 2/1/02 6:27 PM, "Te

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 10:16, Morgan Delagrange wrote: > Some developers proposed that all Jakarta members should get Karma to > Commons automatically. In essence, you would have been able to commit > directly to the Commons repository at any time, even if you had made no > contributions to the Commo

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 09:55, Ted Husted wrote: > The true fact is the PMC Chair has total authority over the Jakareta > codebase, Oh really - you sure? > and can drop anyone's access anytime. The votes are an > important courtesy, I wonder if the board would consider it so. -- Cheers, Pete *-

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 09:31, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > Avalon is no more or less coherent than Commons. > > Really - you are saying that the parts of Avalon have no organized > relationship? Or that the relationships are *exactly equal* to that of the > organized relationships in Commons? Im say

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 10:16, Morgan Delagrange wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 5:02 PM > Subject: Re: [Logging]

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 5:28 PM Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release +1. Let's just drop the status file. I believe that Ted mentioned that in my proposal for the

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

mmons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > ... > > Hm. The discussion that I was participating in was related to the > relationships between the components, not the administrative and > governan

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

, 2002 3:32 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On 2/1/02 6:27 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Very relevant, Morgan, as always. > > >

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 6:27 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 > > Very relevant, Morgan, as always. > > As it stands, the Commons is a subproject like any other. The packages > don't form a single, coherent product, but instead are being used by a > muplicity of other products. > > We can a

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

+1 Very relevant, Morgan, as always. As it stands, the Commons is a subproject like any other. The packages don't form a single, coherent product, but instead are being used by a muplicity of other products. We can all committ to and vote on all the packages here, just like we can in any oth

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

- Original Message - From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 5:21 PM Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > Nice, well-thought out

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

I agree with all that Berin says. He also mentioned what I think is the critical factor for Avalon coherence: a more homogeneous "culture" even across their audience/users. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, F

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

, "Morgan Delagrange" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 4:10 PM > Subjec

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

- Original Message - From: "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 4:10 PM Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > Costin Manolache wrote: > >

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

- Original Message - From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 5:02 PM Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > "Geir Magnusson Jr.&qu

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:52 PM, "Scott Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:51 PM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 6:02 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: >> However, Avalon existed before commons. Why didn't we just work in >> Avalon again? > > > If Avalon looked the way then as it looks now, we might have. > > But it was a very different Avalon a year

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:57 PM, "Scott Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:57 PM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Paulo Gaspar wrote: >>-Original Message- >>From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 11:21 PM >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >>Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release >> >>... &g

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:56 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scott Sanders wrote: >>> privlidge to CVS != privlidge to vote >> >> OK. Problem solved. > > > Committing is ~how~ we vote. > Not in Peter's case. He just said "-1" The only commit he did was adding his name to a file. So peda

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:55 PM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > People who actually Do Things seem to do the Right Things. Non-doing is > what causes problems. And we have no gate right now for 'non-doers'. Peter showed that they can affect things they couldn't meddle with in a meritocratic syst

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:49 PM, "Scott Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [SNIP] Scott : >>> But, then again, why not just create top-level projects whose clear >>> goal is to do 'x'? Geir : >> >> Too many of them. Hard to manage, hard to present... > Scott : > Already

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > However, Avalon existed before commons. Why didn't we just work in > Avalon again? If Avalon looked the way then as it looks now, we might have. But it was a very different Avalon a year ago. -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA. -- Java Web Devel

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:57 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > >>>> Ok - describe what

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

ee. To make your own mind you must start following Avalon-dev. Have fun, Paulo Gaspar > -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 11:51 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE]

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:51 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On 2/1/02 5:50 PM, "Paulo Gasp

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:16 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 08:55, Scott Sanders wrote:

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:21 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 08:48, Geir Magnusso

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Scott Sanders wrote: > He voted -1 on a release. He stated his viewpoint. Does that stop the > release, maybe. He has the right though, as a commons committer to do > that. The code in logging can be directly and indirectly tied to his > work. > > The code talking is the patch I am waiting fo

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

> -Original Message- > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:17 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On 2/1/02 4:54 PM, "Scott Sande

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

Answer inline: > -Original Message- > From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 10:15 PM > > > -Original Message- > > From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 1:04 PM > > > > ... > > And that'

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:20 PM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 08:48, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >>> Peter probably has nothing to do with some of the server components in >>> Avalon, but he has a binding vote for them. How is that resolved? That >>> is the same problem. >> >

RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

I agree as well. Gump has shown us the light, and the light is warm and feel very good ;-) > -Original Message- > From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:10 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE]

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:23 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Scott Sanders wrote: > >> +1 about eveything you said, although I think Peter added himself to the >> STATUS file to make a point about the problems with the model in >> general, not logging in particular. >

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 07:49, Scott Sanders wrote: > > > > > Explicitly state it in a > > > proposal/vote/patch and let's do it. > > > > I have proposed it several times before. If you go back to > > the original vote > > for commons you will see that I only started waving the > > Avalon duplication

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 08:55, Scott Sanders wrote: > > Explain that then from the perspective of Peter's action. > > Which part of the code was talking? > > He voted -1 on a release. He stated his viewpoint. Does that stop the > release, maybe. If it did I prolly wouldn't have done it - I get enou

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 08:48, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > Peter probably has nothing to do with some of the server components in > > Avalon, but he has a binding vote for them. How is that resolved? That > > is the same problem. > > I don't know enough about Avalon and Peter's role. Doesn't seem

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 06:41, Steve Downey wrote: > OK, I'm not a committer, merely a client, but it seems to me that all Peter > proved is that he can act childishly. His position is that he doesn't trust > the other committers. I wouldn't say that - merely that it should work like a meritocracy (li

Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release

On 2/1/02 5:04 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >> On 2/1/02 3:43 PM, "Scott Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> How do you enforce this? How do you handle this in the Avalon world? I >>> consider (only just recently,

  1   2   3   >