Hey Aliaksandr,
I know what you mean and i couldn't agree more...the whole forking idea
was born only out of sympathy for the people that are potentially sick
and tired of me proposing new stuff on the mailing list...i must admit
that i was overly confident and a bit impatient about OPENNLP-496 but
that is only because it is a minuscule change with significant
impact...but yeah you' right - working with the community is indeed very
important and even though the process can be slow at times I think it's
worth the extra effort!
Jim
On 16/04/12 19:23, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote:
Jim, forking is easy, merging is hard. And forking is now but merging is in
future, and this makes it very seductive :)
It took me some iterations with Jörn and others on my initial proposal
about CLI, but at the end the idea became much better. You might
benefit too by working on your proposal with the community.
Aliaksandr
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Jim - FooBar();<[email protected]>wrote:
On 16/04/12 14:41, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
Here is an article about forking AL licensed software:
wow...that article explains everything i need to know! thanks Jorn you
seem to be very resourceful :-)
You did not get any negative feedback on OPENNLP-496,
the reason you did not get more feedback is simply that it was proposed
on a Friday
and no one looked at it over the weekend.
aaa ok i see...i apologise for drawing conclusions. well, it's not that
i'm in a hurry or anything i just hate feeling that i'm becoming a burden
that you have to endure on the mailing list. I'm pretty sure you're all
busy with your own "stuff" so i thought perhaps forking is the best
solution here...i can see great potential in openNLP and that is what
drives me - otherwise i would not bother, trust me! i guess you're right -
i should wait for some feedback before i take any 'big' decisions...
thanks again!
Jim
