and until Tapestry builds under Gump. (not an official requirement just mine as a sponsoring member)
Once both of those are resolved I'll change that to a +1 not before. While I agree that the incubator in its current form has been a wasteful excercise. The incubation period itself proved useful in that it exposed issues that I was not aware of (regarding GPL jars used in example code).
I'm torn, I consider the incubator itself to be a failure and the process (or lack there of) to have dragged on, but the "incubation period" has itself been useful if only for this purpose. Take that as a statement of support supposing you seriously refactor and rescope (smaller) the incubator.
-Andy
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 11/03/2003 8.26:
With respect to Tapestry, I agree. I think the incubator PMC should perhaps vote to promote it into Jakarta. The current limbo is not fair to the people involved.
ACK.
Tapestry has a vibrant community, that has already suffered too much from our incubation "experiment", and that is well taken care of by Dion, Andy, and all the other Jakarta friends.
I thereby bropose that we "release" Tapestry so that it becomes officially part of Jakarta, and that the Jakarta PMC fully takes it in charge.
Incubator PMCers, please cast your votes.
Mine: +1
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
