Hi,
I noticed that the list is starting to devolve a little so perhaps the
opinion of a complete outsider with no bias (that I am aware of) could help ;)
>From what I understand the main objections of a 3.2 are
1. You don't want to have 2 different containers implementing 2.3 under Apache
2. You don't want to have to support something thats main developer has left
3. Splits the dev community between 3 and 4
>From what I understand 1 is a non-issue as Costin has moved it outside
Apache and will work on it there.
I believe that 2 could be solved with a simple vote. A few have said it is
easier to maintain, nicer, more performance friendly etc. If there was
enough people willing to support it regardless of whether Costin leaves
then this would be a non-issue aswell - right ? So why don't all the people
willing to support it place a +1 here. If it gets above a threshold (say 3
votes) then I can't see maintanence being an issue.
The only issue left is that it splits the community. Looking at it from my
perspective I am not sure that the community can be "rejoined/merged" by
any dictate from any group (unless they pay the $$ ;} ). In which case
getting a dictate will only serve to force people out. So isn't 3.x dev
allowed to continue until the maintainers cease to function ;) or 4.x is
ready for bigtime.
Of course I may not have touched on all issues - but this is just based on
what I saw over last few days ;)
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
