commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>
Subject Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
Date Mon, 04 Feb 2002 12:07:31 GMT
On 2/4/02 7:08 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" <paulo.gaspar@krankikom.de> wrote:

>> Well it isn't actually, but I've been told to shut up, so I'll leave it
>> here.
> 
> Unlike Ted, I think you should try to get your point trough.
> 
> If you are sure that everybody else understood your POV and everybody
> is against, THEN it is the time to quit. If you think you were still
> not understood, then you should try to get trough.
> 
> I would not have changed my mind if it was not for Costin arguments.
> That only happened because Costin did not stay quiet.

Nah.  I'm done.  Some people don't understand what I am saying - Ted keeps
trying to go off on tangents like making Commons an ASF project, or whatever
- but that's my fault, I guess.

Some people do, and don't agree.  That's cool.

I made sure I kept my end flame-free, and will keep to that.

Thanks for the interesting discussion.

geir

> 
> 
> Have fun,
> Paulo
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geirm@optonline.net]
>> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 12:40 PM
>> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
>> 
>> 
>> On 2/4/02 6:43 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" <paulo.gaspar@krankikom.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Inline...
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geirm@optonline.net]
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:28 AM
>>>> 
>>>> We have the ability to affect change on this thing I believe
>> is a problem.
>>>> (One answer is "It's not a problem" I suppose...)
>>>> 
>>>> The only answers I hear are "Things are fine" or "Tomorrow..."
>> or "That's
>>>> prevented by the rules".
>>> 
>>> And IT IS prevented by the rules. A lot of people would veto the kind
>>> of nastiness you are afraid of and the mess would be rolled back.
>> 
>> Well it isn't actually, but I've been told to shut up, so I'll leave it
>> here.
>>  
>>> 
>>>> I know it's hypothetical, and has been ruled to be a waste of
>>>> bandwidth, but
>>>> what about the "log4j crew" vs "logkit crew" in the the
>> "everyone gets to
>>>> vote irrespective of contribution" model?
>>> 
>>> AFAIK only some of us are proposing such model to be applied to the
>>> whole Jakarta (and I am NOT one of them).
>>> 
>>> Besides, a lot of people (including me) would prefer to have BOTH
>>> LogKit and Log4J and veto such mess.
>> 
>> I want both too.
>>  
>>> I also think that both logging teams, although not always very wise,
>>> are still much wiser than that.
>>> 
>> 
>> I know. I have high regard for Ceki and Peter.  That's why its
>> hypothetical.
>> 
>> geir
>> 
>> -- 
>> Geir Magnusson Jr.                       geirm@optonline.net
>> System and Software Consulting
>> You're going to end up getting pissed at your software
>> anyway, so you might as well not pay for it. Try Open Source.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr.                                     geirm@optonline.net
System and Software Consulting
Java : the speed of Smalltalk with the simple elegance of C++... 


--
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