Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 29666 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2002 07:49:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Nov 2002 07:49:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 8096 invoked by uid 97); 22 Nov 2002 07:50:21 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 8080 invoked by uid 97); 22 Nov 2002 07:50:20 -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 8068 invoked by uid 98); 22 Nov 2002 07:50:19 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Message-ID: <3DDDE1C3.1070609@apache.org> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 23:50:27 -0800 From: Stefano Mazzocchi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Avalon Developers List Subject: Re: On Multiple Containers References: <200211221522.15262.peter@apache.org> <3DDDDA42.8050802@yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Paul Hammant wrote: > Peter, > > A neat history of Avalon from the synergy pont of view. When read this > way it actually shows that we have good community behaviour. If that was true, why would the ASF have *several* board members and long-time influential persons watching this list with great concern? Also, why would this list have the highest flame-rate of jakarta after jakarta-general@? > The vision > of the uber-container still haunts us all I guess. People are always > going to try again - I guess it is a holy grail. That's fine as long as > there is not a policy to do so that includes the early wind up of > containers that are live and in use by real corporations. Imposing a technical policy on a volunteer group of people is foolish, but looking for ways to improve the health of a community is another story. I hope you see my point. Maybe we won't reach a single container, but hopefully we'll reach the point where Avalon will be considered one community and not a collection of highly egocentric invidividuals like it is perceived today by many outsiders (and I've talked to *many* people at the ApacheCON so I'm not making this up) And the only way I see to do something about it is to have people talk about disagreements that they couldn't solve and containers are the most important point of friction around here so I started from there. -- Stefano Mazzocchi -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: