commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niall Pemberton" <niall.pember...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [all][nabla] proposition for a new project in sandbox
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:57:04 GMT
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:37 AM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 6:11 PM, James Carman
>  <james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>  > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Torsten Curdt <tcurdt@apache.org> wrote:
>  >
>  > >  Well, I am wondering if this really is a "common" need that should go into
>  >  > the commons project. We already have "math".
>  >  >  If it doesn't fit in there it might well be better of to get it into labs
>  >  > IMO - not commons.
>  >  >
>  >
>  >  I agree with Torsten on this one.  Why doesn't this belong as a part
>  >  of math (or maybe a submodule if math wants to have one)?
>  >
>
>  Um...maybe for the same kind of reason that [functor] does not belong
>  inside [collections] ;)
>
>  We don't want to add it to [math] (at least immediately), because it
>  does not really fit with the current focus of [math] and [math] is
>  getting large, and will get larger in 2.0.  Nabla also should not
>  depend on [math] either and could be used by itself.
>
>  As I said, i think it is worth a try and in any case, we should be
>  able to start it in the sandbox.

I agree. I think the sandbox is there to experiment and we should be
pretty liberal for existing committers. I don't know whether this is
suitable for commons or not, but I think that question can be left
until the point when/if it wants to be promoted.

Niall

>  Phil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message