commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ola Berg <ola.b...@arkitema.se>
Subject Re: [OT] Newcomers
Date Thu, 22 Aug 2002 23:08:05 GMT
scolebourne writes:
>-1000000
>There is no difference between libraries that jakarta can share, and
>libraries that everyone can share. Jakarta already has 2 common library
>areas (the other is Avalon Excalibur) and they are gradually trying to move
>code into commons. To create a third (a) is a bad idea, and (b) won\'t be
>allowed by the PMC. After all, how do you decide what goes in which? The
>reality is that you would duplicate all the code - not good.

No, I wasn\'t really proposing a separate project as the easy way out of the situation, just
pointing out that we have rather conflicting goals here, and that it has to be settled, one
way or the other.

Regardless of the original intent of the commons project, I share your view Stephen on what
commons could be, and I also know that creating a true commons code base will lead to refactoring,
breaking existing APIs etc.

I also believe that this in the end will be the best for all parties, and I know that there
need to be a bunch of dedicated commons developers to be in charge of the unification of the
code base, making the parts work well with each other etc.

That said, costin\'s remarks about adhering to the donor project\'s needs are valid also.
Which leads me into believing that there just _have_ to be a settlement, or else we will find
ourself keep writing more emails than code which I think wasn\'t the intention from any of
us when we came here in the first place. I\'m a coder, not a writer.

As for the existence of other \"commons\" projects: Avalon as it stands today is not a general
foundational API, but a (good) specific foundational API (for apps built on the Avalon foundation
within the Avalon framework). It is not the same thing. 

Commons might be or become such a foundational API. That is for others to decide.

Anyhow, the charter needs to be amended or altered or clarified somehow, because this situation
has to be solved. All conflicts on this list recently has I believe emerged due to different
views on what commons is and should be. I hold back my proposals and suggestions and contributions
because I am unclear whether they will fit or not. They will certainly fit if commons is what
you propose it should be. But is it? Will it ever?

/O

--------------------
ola.berg@arkitema.se
0733 - 99 99 17

--
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