www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason van Zyl <ja...@zenplex.com>
Subject Re: Ant PMC Issue (was: RE: [proposal] daedalus jar repository)
Date Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:43:05 GMT
On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 10:28, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 09:34, Greg Stein wrote:
> >>On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 09:48:42PM +1100, dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>[I won't even get into the question of why those two can't be related
> >>>>projects under a single PMC]
> >>>
> >>>Read the Ant mission....it specifically states the Ant build system as 
> >>>it's scope.
> >>
> >>Bah. The Board can easily change the scope if there are better ways to
> >>organize the software that we [the ASF] produce.
> >>
> >>Existing charters shouldn't get in the way of What Is Right.
> > 
> > "What Is Right" ?
> > 
> > So that's going to be the board deciding what is right? What project's
> > themselves want is not right enough? That is frightening. What happened
> > to project self direction/determination?
> 
> The board changes things like scope based on resolutions provided to it. 
>   If the committers to Ant and Maven wanted to cooperate, then a joint 
> proposal could be authored for consideration by the board.
> 
> The idea of such committer initiated proposals do not concern me, unless 
> such proposals attempt to establish responsibility for items that are 
> within the scope of other, existing projects.

Oh, you mean like the Avalon resolution which cross-cuts several other
projects like Turbine and Struts. That one didn't seem to bother you.
Don't make vague assertions when it's your personal agenda here Sam
that's driving the cart.

Or how about we make a tautalogical resolution like the Ant or Cocoon
resolutions which got passed. I'm fine with changing the resolution to
something like those of Ant or Cocoon: "The Maven Project will deal with
the Maven system". But again those didn't really bother you either. But
Maven's does. Or how about we add an addendum where the project has to
have decent code and some _tests_ and actual users. That would pretty
leave Maven standing by itself.

It is not for you to personally decide who and who shouldn't work
together because that's what's happening and that's complete bullshit. I
know the board relies on you for their primary source information with
anything to do with Jakarta and I think the time has come for you to be
called on stacking the deck when what occurs doesn't line up with your
little vision of how OSS should work. It is soley up the project
participants to decide who they want to work with. Not you. I hope for
your sake that you adhere to your word when you said you would abstain
from the vote on Maven's PMC if there was a conflict of interest because
there is a conflict of interest.

And if you reply to this don't exerpt the bits you don't like as you
usually do.

> - Sam Ruby
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
-- 
jvz.

Jason van Zyl
jason@zenplex.com
http://tambora.zenplex.org

In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
  
  -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society


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


Mime
View raw message