Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 13326 invoked by uid 6000); 25 Apr 1999 13:48:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 13318 invoked from network); 25 Apr 1999 13:48:34 -0000 Received: from slarti.muc.de (193.149.48.10) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 25 Apr 1999 13:48:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 8946 invoked by uid 66); 25 Apr 1999 13:50:21 -0000 Received: from en by slarti with UUCP; Sun Apr 25 13:50:21 1999 -0000 Received: by en1.engelschall.com (Sendmail 8.9.3+3.2W) for new-httpd@apache.org id PAA39305; Sun, 25 Apr 1999 15:47:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 15:47:18 +0200 From: "Ralf S. Engelschall" To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: Back to the roots Message-ID: <19990425154718.A39049@engelschall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i Organization: Engelschall, Germany. X-Web-Homepage: http://www.engelschall.com/ X-PGP-Public-Key: https://www.engelschall.com/ho/rse/pgprse.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 00 C9 21 8E D1 AB 70 37 DD 67 A2 3A 0A 6F 8D A5 Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org In article <199904251335.JAA07912@devsys.jaguNET.com> you wrote: > Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: >[...] > Now that the cat is out of the bag, however, what will happen if, for > example, AG decides that having src/helpers available as a seperate > package IS worthwhile and decides to do it? Hhmmmmm... nothing, I think. The AG is allowed to create an own AG package, because the AG _OWNS_ the particular version of the scripts under src/helpers/* and has the copyright on it. So, why should something happen? No, it just would be a little bit silly to have two totally similar packages... > No matter what, however, people have the right and indeed the obligation > to bring up sticky points. I don't care a fig if I never contributed a > single line of code (which is, of course, not the case), as a member of > AG I have the responsibility to the group and if I see something which > I think could compromise it, I have to bring it up. Sure. > I'm sure no one wants you to leave AG. I certainly don't. I brought > this up to ensure that people could discuss it, rather than people > not talking about it and maybe the seeds of contention and alienation > being planted. Yes, accepted. Perhaps shtool was only the reason for bringing up the topic the first time, although I always treat such things a little bit to personally. Nevertheless I think we should really considering going back to the roots or we will fail in the long-term. I'm at least personally 100% convinced that we will not survive in the long-term when we don't go back to the roots of coding and reducing politics... Ralf S. Engelschall rse@engelschall.com www.engelschall.com