On 7/28/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/28/07, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/28/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Simon, my thoughts are the same. I don't see commons being exclusively > > > Java. Perhaps APR library and the C++ template would sit in here too. > > > > Disagreed. I can see, of course, that the idea of commons makes sense > > for other programming languages too. But, unlike in the case of > > logging, Axis, or comparable projects, I fail to see a connection. So > > I'd vote against increasing commons in that sense. I'd rather see a > > change of the name (commons-java, or whatever). > > +1 or if theres a desire for the equivalent of a Commons in C++ - then > they just need to come up with a new/different project name.
If I recall correctly, that was the low level feeling on the board call - it's not a big deal for other projects to just use a different name. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
