incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <>
Subject Re: Marc Fleury reacts (Fw: [JBoss-dev] July 2003 news)
Date Mon, 11 Aug 2003 21:01:05 GMT
On 8/11/03 4:08 PM, "robert burrell donkin" <> wrote:

> On Sunday, August 10, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> On 8/10/03 5:30 AM, "robert burrell donkin" <> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, August 9, 2003, at 03:46 AM, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
>>> 2. tapestry lacked active support from apache members.
>> That is NOT true.
> no offense intended andrew. i didn't know that you were a member (but i
> should have checked up before posting).

No problem.  I just wanted to clarify that this was not actually true.  I
went to Tapestry, helped them learn the voting rules, decision making
process, etc.  However there was no acceptance process to communicate
because it was in flux.

It is my opinion that the incubator is an ill-conceived entity because it
gives ownership to those who do not have a natural interest in the
particular community.  Tapestry makes a poor example though because they
were the first, got pushed around by jakarta then by the incubator, etc.

Its like having a remote process for thread management.


> - robert
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Andrew C. Oliver
Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI
For Java and Excel, Got POI?

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message