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 Mon, 07 Jan 2002 01:09:51 GMT
on 1/6/02 5:04 PM, "Sam Ruby" <> wrote:

> Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>> Commons?
>>> Thanks for volunteering.
>> No. I see it as David volunteering and the Jakarta project as management.
>> However, we don't have any management...hence why I think that things are
>> messed up.
>> [snip]
>> Ok, I -1 the inclusion of his code as the validation framework for the
>> Commons project in favor of using Intake as the basis.
> Sigh.  Last month, I was saddened by the following:

What is sad about that?


And john mcnally worked to bring it up to date in the last is
getting closer. If people worked together instead of coming up with their
own stuff every week maybe stuff would get finalized and released.

The excuse of a good code base being to hard to understand so it should be
re-implemented doesn't fly with me.

> This month, I am saddened by someone using his -1 to block progress towards
> contributing a reusable and independent code base to the commons.

You forgot 'duplicated'.

> You want to know how management decisions are made?  We have a person
> volunteering to do the work based on the struts code base.  Unless there is
> a better offer out there, I see a rather easy management decision to make.
> And that is coming from someone who tends towards non-intervention.

However, good management knows what resources to allocate to what

This issue stems all the way back to the Tomcat3 vs. Tomcat4 discussions.
Why is it a good thing to have half of the people working on T3 and half on
T4? Why not combine the *limited* resources towards working on one common


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

View raw message