Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 44469 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2002 11:36:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Nov 2002 11:36:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 9071 invoked by uid 97); 17 Nov 2002 11:36:34 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 9044 invoked by uid 97); 17 Nov 2002 11:36:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 9028 invoked by uid 98); 17 Nov 2002 11:36:33 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Subject: Re: [Proposal] Breaking up Avalon From: Leo Simons To: Avalon-Phoenix Developers List Cc: Avalon Development In-Reply-To: <200211171918.29177.peter@apache.org> References: <200211171918.29177.peter@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) Date: 17 Nov 2002 12:34:15 +0100 Message-Id: <1037532855.1426.53.camel@lsd.student.utwente.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi Peter, On Sun, 2002-11-17 at 09:18, Peter Donald wrote: > I had hoped that it would not get to this point but unfortunately that does > not seem to be the case. However it looks like the best thing for all parties > involved is to break up Avalon into different projects. One of the first > things I am going to propose is the graduation of Phoenix and related > infrastructure to a new top level project. I personally think that making phoenix a new top level project would be bad for apache as a whole because of the grossly overlapping concerns between any such phoenix project and a possible avalon project; we would have rather permanent fragmentation of community. I think that this would be bad from the perspective of users of apache software because it becomes difficult to choose between what would become competing projects (right now, we as avalon community can say "go use Avalon Phoenix or Avalon ECM, this-and-that version" and the competition is internal). I think you could be right though that splitting of phoenix would be good for the avalon developer community (as it has apparently become difficult for some developers in that community to work together and the community is failing to resolve those issues (taking this proposal as evidence of that)), and this could then of course be good for the software that comes out of that community, which could then be good for apache as a whole and users of that software. On this I still second the words of Greg Stein, which I'll paraphrase and summarize as "the avalon developers need to learn how to work together". As an aside, I would say your depiction of recent history is not accurate, but whether it is or not probably does not matter. All that said, if a majority of the phoenix developers does want to split off, I think it is the apache way to not be in the way. cheers, - Leo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: