Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-struts-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 80443 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2008 21:43:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Jan 2008 21:43:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 64976 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jan 2008 21:43:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-struts-dev-archive@struts.apache.org Received: (qmail 64936 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jan 2008 21:43:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Struts Developers List" Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@struts.apache.org Received: (qmail 64922 invoked by uid 99); 16 Jan 2008 21:43:34 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:43:33 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [216.227.215.170] (HELO chiron.lunarpages.com) (216.227.215.170) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:43:20 +0000 Received: from c-71-230-45-78.hsd1.pa.comcast.net ([71.230.45.78] helo=[192.168.123.198]) by chiron.lunarpages.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JFG2R-0000Rb-7a for dev@struts.apache.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:43:11 -0800 Message-ID: <478E7A62.8020608@omnytex.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:42:58 -0500 From: "Frank W. Zammetti" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: [S2] Libraries in JDK 1.4 distribution References: <478C41B5.4050800@omnytex.com> <16d6c6200801142208v552b0d59s5bbd6b1fec9e9761@mail.gmail.com> <478C5559.8080600@omnytex.com> <16d6c6200801152101g4cc26b29q2a4ef7fbaf71729c@mail.gmail.com> <478D94C0.5040700@omnytex.com> <16d6c6200801152151w24910a5dwa19ee89544fb93a7@mail.gmail.com> <478DA305.8000206@omnytex.com> <55afdc850801160628l5fd1ac66v646b8fb27b8a339c@mail.gmail.com> <478E2709.6090007@omnytex.com> <55afdc850801161316u30ee2f1se293da17ad94c568@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55afdc850801161316u30ee2f1se293da17ad94c568@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - chiron.lunarpages.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - struts.apache.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - omnytex.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Jan 16, 2008 3:47 PM, Frank W. Zammetti wrote: >> Niall Pemberton wrote: >>> For the record I agree with Martin and in my book votes-are-votes >>> whoever they come from. >> Well, I'm reading the bylaws right now: > > Yeah and missing the wood for the trees. Not a fair comment Niall. All people have to go on is the stated policy of a project, of which the bylaws are a primary part of. If they aren't an accurate reflection of the reality, there's a problem. I'm not missing a thing, except that Struts apparently has its bylaws, and then they have another set of "bylaws" that are actually acted upon that live in the minds of its developers and not in the written words of the stated bylaws. I view this is a problem. > Vetos need justification > whoever they're from and it the justification is considered valid I'm > sure it would be acted upon. +1s are easier to throw around, but I'm a > whole lot happier the more I see, again whoever they're from. I'm in complete agreement with that, and I have ZERO doubt that binding voters taken non-binding votes into account. > Hopefully (personal opinion coming here) people throwing a +1 on a > release means they've at least checked out the distro and tested it in > some way. Also completely agree, doesn't matter where the +1 comes from, you'd hope, and I'm relatively sure, that's usually the case. > The fact that most votes I see is usually committers is > disappointing and I think you're just contributing in this debate to > putting off non-committers voting by telling them they have no value. Absolutely not! Questioning something in a project in no way diminishes the project, it in fact enhances it. That's what I'm doing here, questioning and seeking clarification, which so far has been elusive. I am in no way, shape or form telling anyone their vote has no value. What I *AM* pointing out is that there is NO WAY TO KNOW who's vote actually has value, and how much, because the written bylaws arguably do not represent the reality... and I only say arguably because there's discrepancy in whether they do apply or not, and what's been said in this thread 100% supports that claim. > Whatever the policy/by-laws/rules/admin says is it currently working - > I would say so, except it would be nice to have more people voting. Yes, it's working. But that's no guarantee it always will, and there's nothing to say it couldn't work better. What I don't understand is why there's any hesitation to get the bylaws inline with reality, whatever that reality is. Isn't that the easy answer? Ends any debate between Ted and Martin, shuts me up, and likely gets more people to vote because they understand precisely what it means to do so. Forget any of the specifics, why is that singular goal not desirable? > Niall Frank -- Frank W. Zammetti Author of "Practical Ajax Projects With Java Technology" (2006, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-695-1) and "JavaScript, DOM Scripting and Ajax Projects" (2007, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-816-4) and "Practical DWR 2 Projects" (2008, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-941-1) Java Web Parts - http://javawebparts.sourceforge.net Supplying the wheel, so you don't have to reinvent it! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org