If I have read it right, I do agree with the point that we need to give committers access to people more freely. Suggested solution of having a separate development branch sounds good to me (don't know how feasible it is).
-v On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:06 AM, Luc Maisonobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I would strongly protest against such a move. > > > I wasn't proposing such a move, merely speculating. > > > > Commons are used outside > > of the ASF and are successful there. I even think [math] is used almost > > only outside of ASF and not internally ... Commons appear also as low > > level libraries for general use and this should not be stopped. > > > > I have seen many projects that depend on a huge number of libraries. For > > such projects, a reliable set of reusable components with consistent > > look and feel is a sure gain. > > > > Low level components are important and from my experience often need > > specific development rules, very strict ones. The reason for that is > > that you can never make any assumptions on how a low level component > > will be called/integrated/reused from a random high level complete > > application. > > > > I see the views expressed in both the original post and the previous > > message as if high level applications were the only important thing and > > low level components were second class "toys" to share but not to care > > too much about. Is this really what you meant or did I misunderstood > > your point ? > > > I believe you misunderstood. I know that I did not mean to imply that, and > I'm certain that Hen didn't either. His uses of the word "toys" are a play > on an English idiom about "taking ones toys and going home", and are not > meant to imply that there's anything toy-like about Commons components. On > the contrary, I think we're both arguing that Commons components are > important enough that we want to find ways to encourage people to bring > reusable code here rather than simply keep it to themselves and not sharing > it. > > -- > Martin Cooper > > > Luc > > > > > > > > No answers here, I'm afraid. Just some additional thoughts to add to > the > > > mix. > > > > > > -- > > > Martin Cooper > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Apologies for writing this as a blog rather than an email - it felt > > >> more natural and will pull in other opinions: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > http://blog.generationjava.com/roller/bayard/entry/the-open-and-federated-commons > > >> > > >> Hen > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- The first right of human is the right of EGO. -- http://www.xperienceexperience.blogspot.com
