On 3/15/06, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/15/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > would jakarta have been any less an umbrella if three years ago we'd started
> > rolling a huge jakarta.jar?
>
> Most likely, noone would have used it (in particular, not the
> developers),
the developers wouldn't but IIRC misguided and slightly users asked
for one from time to time. ("take two java libraries into the shower?
i just jakarta and go!" ;)
> so you are right: Roys's definition may be formally
> wrong. In practice, I believe he's got a point. The common deliverable
> (like Geronimo, or httpd) is well suited to bind people together.
that's true enough: moving to more focussed projects is an improvement.
but jakarta managed to be pretty cohesive with a very noisy community
even without a single master product.
it would have been easy to come up with some sort of reasonable
charter and focus: but that would have done nothing to address the
issue of the mismatch between the legal structure (TLP) and the formal
organizational one (sub-projects, sub-sub-projects).
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
