Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
I guess you and I think quite differently about certain things. In
another part of this discussion, you mentioned malice as a reason not
to give people commit access on an "on-demand" basis. However, this is
something that hardly oc
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Well, have you considered the positional issues I raised in the
earlier post? The order in which people vote is quite important.
Offhand, here is an idea:
You know, I meant to address that and I completely forgot :) I think
you do raise a
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Welcome Jonathan! Better late than never :)
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Well, to put it another way, if I were assigned the task of
evaluating different things in this space, and Struts was one of
them, it is very unlikely that I would settle
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Welcome Jonathan! Better late than never :)
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
I think here we have to agree to disagree. I see there being a
responsibility involved that you don't. It isn't like anyone can
just come along and contribute, contrary to what we
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
A third point that I must make in this context is that, though, in the
above, I am criticizing the "electoral democracy" aspects of this, I
actually don't subscribe to the idea that an open source project is a
one man-one vote d
Craig McClanahan wrote:
On 3/19/06, Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You say this as if it is the most obvious thing in the world. But is it?
I am quite skeptical. You take as a given that commit privileges have to
be closely guarded, like a high priesthood guards the inner s
#x27;t know how other people see things. This is just my honest
reaction. I have no vested interest in this.
Regards,
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
But, being part of that necessary barrier too is part of the
responsibility, at least as I view thi
101 - 107 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
