commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Sanders" <ssand...@nextance.com>
Subject RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
Date Tue, 29 Jan 2002 22:01:25 GMT
With this here is my +1 for the release as of now...

Scott

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:bloritsch@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 2:05 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
> 
> 
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
> 
> >>>
> >>However, if you guys tried to work with us from the outset, much of 
> >>this confusion would never have risen.
> >>
> > 
> > Maybe at that time we *didn't* want to work together for some very 
> > specific reasons. After all, the original commons proposal, which I 
> > was part of, was -1ed only by Peter, because we apparently had 
> > diverging opinions about how shared code should be 
> governed. Given the 
> > number of components in the commons, I think it has been quite 
> > successful with its goals, and it did abide by its basic principles 
> > (openness, bazaar style repository, extremely few external 
> > dependencies, no imposed coding style, etc etc).
> 
> 
> Hmmm.   Remy, I have to say this sounds quite petty.
> 
> 
> 
> > I'm also greatly disturbed by the timing and the ferocity of your 
> > complaints. AFAIK, nobody here did invent the facade pattern or the 
> > Logger interface (or whatever you choose to call it). It 
> seems Rodney 
> > came up with something similar to LogKit by accident.
> 
> 
> Timing maybe, ferocity?  If you think that is ferocity, then 
> you haven't had any kind of debate yet.
> 
> Seriously though, if I had known that this project was 
> started before we had our own Logger abstraction, I could 
> have championed the cause for Avalon. As it is now, we can't 
> very well go back and deprecate yet again what is supposed to 
> be a stable API.
> 
> By choosing not to work with us openly, you have kept the 
> Avalon community from the benefits of your work.  All for a 
> seemingly petty reason.  I have dealt with Peter on a number 
> of occasions, and I really appreciate the guy. He is very 
> oppinionated, its true, but he *can* be convinced.  You just 
> have to be persistent, and explain your thinking clearly.
> 
> The "I 'tried' and gave up" attitude is bad.
> 
> 
> 
> > Now, if all you want is some credit for "being there", then 
> so be it, 
> > you have it :) You just could have asked it a lot sooner 
> and in a lot 
> > nicer way.
> 
> 
> Sooner, no.  Nicer way, possibly.
> 
> 
> 
> > Scott added that: "That is the past.  This is the present, 
> and I WANT 
> > Avalon and commons to work in harmony, not dischord." Well, 
> maybe, but 
> > the present still reminds me of the past a lot :-( 
> Hopefully, that's 
> > the last time it happens.
> 
> 
> Well, perhaps we can both get over ourselves and just move 
> on.  I'm willing to burry the hatchet if you are.  However, I 
> *don't* like when projects that can work together 
> disassociate because of petty reasons.  If there are *real* 
> technical reasons, I can appreciate it.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little 
> temporary safety
>   deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>                  - Benjamin Franklin
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:commons-dev-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For 
> additional commands, 
> e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message