Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 67104 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2002 00:16:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2002 00:16:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 5921 invoked by uid 97); 2 Feb 2002 00:16:20 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 5905 invoked by uid 97); 2 Feb 2002 00:16:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 5894 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2002 00:16:19 -0000 Reply-To: From: "Paulo Gaspar" To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Subject: RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 01:32:17 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Ok, I am converted! Paulo P.S.: But I will not reinvent Peter's code! I will just copy it, credits and all! =;o) > -----Original Message----- > From: costinm@covalent.net [mailto:costinm@covalent.net] > Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 1:14 AM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release > > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > Separate voting rights not commit rights. Only people who show > commitment to > > a product should be able to have binding votes on it. > > _Using_ a commons component in another jakarta project is a huge > commitment to that component. The rule is there to make people know > that they can use a commons component without fear. The rule > allows people that use a component to get more involved in it's > development - including by vote and review of the code and vetoing > change that are wrong. > > That's what makes commons successfull IMHO. Changing that will turn > it into avalon - who may have nice code, but most people prefer > to reimplement the code rather than using it. > > ( and don't tell me that it's the fault of the mean people who > just want to reinvent the wheel. The fact that commons got where > it is today proves that we can share code ) > > Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: