commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From A Leg <hale_in...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: maven : why marmalade ?
Date Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:52:57 GMT
Hi Simon

Thank's for your answer.

I don't see any answer about the community process.

To help for answer I explain this question below giving an example on 
how it works with Jini :
When Jini team want to change/improve some specification. Before to do 
it they propose it to the community, so community can vote.

This is the way that all standards works (Iso, Env, etc..).

Why maven, and more generaly, apache projects does not follow similar way ?

It could be costly, for users, to change to often and standards try to 
be stable.
That is why I was asking for the reasons of change : to know what will 
be the benefits, to understand and appreciate.

Have fun

Andre


Simon Kitching wrote:

>On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 08:36 +0000, A Leg wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi
>>
>>I just got a look on maven 2 description and I have some questions ?
>>    
>>
>
>I suggest you try the maven list for answers specifically about
>marmalade/jelly and the future of Maven.
>
>  
>
>>What about marmelade license which seems not to be Apache License V2 ?
>>    
>>
>
>It's a BSD license which is perfectly compatible with the Apache
>license. Not every good project in the world is here at Jakarta...
>
>  
>
>>What about living an Apache project for a codehaus project ?
>>    
>>
>
>If people think it's better then it's their choice. Projects get
>superceded by better designs over time - that's progress. Sometimes it
>happens as version N+1 of an existing project, sometimes it's something
>external.
>
>Besides, I *believe* that maven2 provides the option to use Marmalade,
>Jelly or any other language. So it's adding options rather than dropping
>Jelly support.
>
>  
>
>>I personaly feel that all hat moves : ant to maven, cvs to subversion, 
>>jelly to marmalade where people create news peojects instead of 
>>contributing to improve existing one, all these moves are not a big 
>>advantage for open source.
>>    
>>
>
>If you don't like change, I'm afraid you're in the wrong industry.
>Computer software is improving fast, and that means change. Yes it's a
>little tiring to keep up sometimes but that's better than stagnation.
>
>It's not just open source; people are screaming about the end of Visual
>Basic and Win9x. And Borland JBuilder users are facing a change soon -
>to a product built on Eclipse. Tough luck, times change.
>
>  
>
>>Already my ISP does not support Linux because instead of having one good 
>>linuxconf they have many "proprietary" configuration tools.
>>    
>>
>
>Then they're fools. They should pick one linux distribution and stay
>with it; no need to support multiple types. And anyway the differences
>between linux variants really are pretty trivial. I suspect they're not
>telling you the real reason.
>
>Regards,
>
>Simon
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>  
>


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


Mime
View raw message