On Jan 3, 2008 9:00 AM, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Exec would need to migrate to proper first. > >> > > According to the website moving to proper requires an "active group > > of committers" - I hardly qualifiy for that so I'm sort of stuck > > That was my concern > > > Therefore I see two options > > > > +) one existing committer teams up with me (preferred but rather > > unlikely looking at the recent activity) > > +) I leave commons-exec at it is in the sandbox and push out a > > SNAPSHOT release > > IMO a SNAPSHOT release is not really what we want. But I guess we (as > a community) need to discuss situations like these. The definition of > active committers is rather vague in this context. After all we have > quite some "one man shows" where other committers just help out. But > not releasing "exec" does not sounds like a better option either.
I agree the only option is really to propose promoting exec to become a proper component and then release. For me the question is how likely is Siegfried to stick around to support it? I would hate to see it promoted and then it go inactive again shortly after. I know circumstances change and there are no binding commitments here - but stating an intention to stick around and look after it when proposing promotion would make me more likely to vote for it (plus yours and Luc's semi-interest helps). Looking at the commit logs, the people to last work on actual code were Niklas Gustavsson (July 2006), Trygve Laugstoul (Sept 2005) and Brett Porter (August 2005) - perhaps it would be also worth pinging them to see if their interest can be revived. Niall > Thoughts? > > cheers > -- > Torsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
