>> ...and it's still the term we are using: >> >> http://commons.apache.org/components.html > > You miss my point(s): It's totally clear what a component is, > as defined by "Commons". The issue is how it relates to the > "Commons project" management.
That does not sound like "totally clear" to me. That sounds like a question. For whatever reason it feels like you are a bit hung up on the term. I merely wanted to point out that we've been using this term for a while now. ...and your query should probably also have listed that link. Forget the term for now. It's irrelevant for this discussion. > Öne point is that the "Commons project" releases _independent_ > components (cf. the other post); there is no relationship > whatsoever between the components. There is the build system for some, for some it's the people - be it just for oversight. And then there is the PMC and the board reports. Claiming there is no relationship is a very code centric point of view - and frankly speaking a little concerning. I agree - commits and jira notifications can be a lot of traffic. But just the dev list on it's own is so little traffic that I am having trouble understanding why we are having this discussion at all. Why not keep the one dev list, you unsubscribe from the commits ML and keep track of issues and commits through github and jira directly? Could that work? cheers, Torsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
