commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jon Scott Stevens <>
Subject Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content
Date Sun, 06 Jan 2002 22:15:05 GMT
on 1/6/02 1:45 PM, "Sam Ruby" <> wrote:

> Jon, I presume that you are talking about the subject, and not the text you
> are quoting.  In any case, a framework independent validator seems to me to
> be valuable a reusable component.  If one or both can't be restructed to be
> framework independent, then that would seem to be a reasonable explanation
> for the duplication.  If both can, then merging of the best of both here in
> commons would seem to be the wisest path.

I don't see why the basis isn't Intake. Why not work to move Intake to
commons and then work towards a framework independent implementation in

Of course it is easier to start from scratch to invent yet another
validation framework. This is where I see another failure of Jakarta. People
only go with the easiest route without any concern about the long term mess
they are making.

I feel like Jakarta is just going down this path of having a bazillion
different implementations and versions of the same thing and it is only
getting worse. Commons was supposed to help clean that up by providing a
central location, however all I see is it making it worse because people are
just re-inventing what already exists in other projects instead of using
existing projects as the basis.

A perfect example of this recently was the discussion about Torque. Hey,
Torque exists, but it is *easier* to re-invent it rather than simply spend
the time to figure it out, understand it and move it to commons (or a top
level project).

I'm starting to realize that Jakarta has grown to becoming a place where
people only scratch their own itches and I agree that that is the basis for
open source. However, we have no overall direction. We all have our own
opinions and spend days and days discussing them and when it comes down to
putting code into CVS, people do whatever they want anyway because there is
no set of checks and balances to put some sort of higher level control over

In Java Apache, these issues never came up because there were only a few
projects and a few people expressing their opinions. Now, Jakarta has grown
into literally hundreds of people expressing their opinions and doing what
they want. Commons has become an area where people have a free CVS commit
tree to put whatever they want into it, which is fine, however these people
doing the commits haven't spent the time to do things as simple as figuring
out what the proper way to format code according to the Jakarta rules.

People keep saying that Jakarta isn't broken. Well, if it isn't broken, then
how come we have so many people doing their own thing and not working
together? Jakarta is supposed to be a group collective, however it is
becoming nothing more than another Sourceforge.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message