-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Brian Behlendorf wrote: > It seems to me that any honest assessment of the merit of > accepting a proposal should include a look at the code itself, if only to > get a gut-check on how maintainable and evolveable that codebase might be > going forward.
why? if the idea excites people but the code sucks, are we going to turn it down? > Many proposals have provided just such a link despite it > not being required. Requiring it would also avoid the situation where > someone says "if Apache approves it *then* I'll release the code". why do we want to avoid this situation? what business of it is ours if the submitter wants to entrust their baby to us and only to us? we should say no when given such an expression of confidence? - -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBQPJi85rNPMCpn3XdAQGJbgQAse4g1psWSqcpA/3BdhKK4kRkt3SxIENt +iiOOmNSRe2FcIFqZEsE1OFzKp6IETWEyrRFy+Zqxn7pzHA6E+0RqczP1ZJE+r42 yVcQQfIPsvJe3RFDN460TL66now9FLFDAQbg+bmOLRErDEyMjr3vuOYijp6PRYC+ wspiBggzGwQ= =KZ8l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
