--- Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm always interested, but it's always been > somewhere down my list of > priorities :( >
I'm in a similar boat with Brett. I am fairly familiar with the pre-fork version of this code and would be available as a contingency resource if nothing else. > If Siegfried is able to drive it to release quality, > I can likely > start using it in a number of places which will > increase my > involvement. > There was talk about migrating Ant to use [exec] once it had baked, IIRC; the holdup is that Ant's status as a build tool has always mandated that it have negligible dependencies. This would mean we would want to use some sort of svn or other trickery to accomplish this. An external might suffice, but other ideas are welcome at [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) -Matt > Thanks! > > Cheers, > Brett > > On 04/01/2008, Niall Pemberton > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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] > > > > > > > -- > Brett Porter > Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
