Christoph Wilhelms wrote, On 06/03/2003 9.57:
At this stage, I think it is appropriate for us to look at Ruper. Centipede is, at this stage, something to layer on top of Ant and should remain separate, IMHO.
I agree that Centipede should remain separate and remain on top of Ant.
I also think that Centiepde can become an Ant subproject in it's own right, with committers that have access only to the eventual "ant-centiepde" module.
I support this idea! I see Centipede on the same level as Antidote! Supprojects additionally do not have anything to do with the Ant releases or release schedule and bugs/issues!
This is our initial idea.
Probably Centipede has to be incubated before ;).
Well, I'm in the incubator PMC, and I've been following it since the start using Apache methods... I would personally regard it as already incubated.
Should Ruper become a subproject, too?
Dunno, probably it could make sense to make Ruper and Version part of a subproject that deals with extra tasks... let's just start in the sandbox by working on it and make a more clear idea form out of usage.
Gump should - IMHO - become an Ant SUBProject, too (Jakarta -> Ant)
Let's keep Gump out for the moment. All Apache committers have access to Gump, so it's not really important ATM.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------