ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Randall J. Parr" <RP...@TemporalArts.COM>
Subject Re: PMC official business
Date Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:48:57 GMT
Peter Donald wrote:

> At 10:58  31/1/01 -0600, Randall J. Parr wrote:

> >Further, I would like to see a preference (not a rule) for Apache projects to
> >use these common development tools. As someone stated in another message,
> when
> >Apache includes log4j that says to me (maybe incorrectly) Apache thinks
> this is
> >the package to use (at least one of the best to use).  It is very
> frustrating to
> >see Apache projects, even subprojects in the same project all using a
> different
> >methods to handle configruation and logging. It really raises the learning
> curve
> >for using the software and raises the learning curve for contributing even
> >higher.
>
> It would be nice but it is not always possible ;) People work on what they
> feel like. You can not force them to adopt something someone else did -
> especially when they spent ages building it. Some of the projects overlap
> but have significant differences/points of difference. ie Why do we have
> two regex libraries here? Some are legacy issues (ie I built a log4j-like
> logging system before it was Apache sanctioned). Some are just competition
> or different thinking (Cocoon2 actions vs Turbine actions).

I understand people prefer to continue using the solution they've built.

On the other hand, I have watched a long and continuing discussion on the FOP
list about how / when / what are we going to use to handle configuration /
properties / etc. The FOP folks are not invested in their own solution and
generally appear to prefer using an existing package (esp an Apache one). All the
suggestions from other Apache projects seem to imply adopting not just the
foundation for configuration, logging, what-have-you but also much of the other
projects framework and philosphy.

I feel there is a foundatation (I believe what you mean by API layer) that most
projects could use without really forcing them to do things that much differently
and, hopefully, freeing them from (what some would call) mundane details.

I also feel projects outside Apache might adopt the Apache "foundation" even if
they don't want to or can't adopt the higher level projects. IMHO this broader
participation would provide great support and continuation of the "foundation"
and make everyone's life easier.

R.Parr
Temporal Arts



Mime
View raw message