incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: veto stuff (was: Code ownership)
Date Fri, 08 Nov 2002 01:33:56 GMT
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 12:05, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> As you have choosen to drag these issue up here - I am to some obliged
> to provide the information to complete the picture.  Perhaps it would be
> of interest to people to know that the changes to the Cornerstone
> components introduced by yourself (as a result of changes to Phoenix)
> resulted in non-backward compatible change.  A situation that you seem
> determined to ignore. 

errrr ... ok then.

> You are happy when you can deflect this as a
> container issue - when in fact the issue is simply your mistake. 

nope - done by design. 

> You
> replace Component + Block with nothing.  That breaks the interface.
>  That broke backward compatability.  

they are proxied in the container that the services are written for.

> There were subsequent discussions
> on the dev list that came to the conclusion that the re-introduction of
> the Component interface was the appropriate action.  That has never
> happended - could it be that your original veto was at fault?

Doesn't really matter what you think. You have never contributed to the 
project, the veto is supported by others, James developers are not un-happy 
with the current situation. Yet you chose to ignore the veto multiple times 
and got narky when it was reverted. 

Apache is governed on merit - you have never contributed to cornerstone in any 
way shape or form to it. Others who have contributed and spent considerable 
time designing, writing, evolving and maintaining cornerstone did not approve 
of the changes. If you followed Apaches rules then that should be that.

You want a hand in determining its direction then show some respect, put in a 
bit of effort to help us develope it and you will have to lobby people who 
veto things. If you don't want to follow Apaches process then why are you 


Peter Donald
 The fact that nobody understands you doesn't 
 mean you're an artist.

View raw message