On Sep 21, 2009, at 9:09 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Hughes <hugh...@apache.org>
wrote:
If it IS a goal to become a large component registry for "anything
OSGI enterprisey" then my -1 vote will stand.
Really it isn't. I mentioned earlier in this thread that Aries will
seek to use components from other projects where they exist.
I rest my case. Your argument is that the text is sufficient, I mean
it is not (too inclusive).
Let's adjourn this for the graduation. I am urging that the community
along the way think long and hard on the formulation of project
mission.
My 2 cents.
Let a thousand flowers bloom.
IMO, mission statements are silly in that they are mere descriptions
to attract contributors. An elevator speech if you will; though
Aries' mission statement is irritatingly long winded as one of Bill
Clinton's speeches. IMO, anyone trying to enforce a stricter usage of
mission statements is protecting turf.
I don't care if there is or isn't overlap w/ existing projects so long
as there is a vibrant community behind it. Huge projects are not a
problem until they try to protect their "turf". But turf protection
is a potential problem of all projects; frankly some of the objections
of other projects' members smacks of turf protection. Contributors
are free to place their contributions where ever they wish.
I trust the ASF membership to invariably provide an environment for
free and unencumbered choices.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
