Erik Abele wrote: > > Oh, of course - but for now there's no community yet so he is > complaining into the blue sky :) > > I'd certainly like to see a response to the concerns raised by Martin > but OTOH I don't think that it should evolve into a discussion about > basic architectural principles or even impact the final consideration > of incubation. > > It's just the initial code, nothing more :) >
I don't agree with this statement. The code itself is indeed only the initial codebase but along with this codebase come an established group of committers with an interest in keeping their current architecture or at least backward compatibility An established codebase is *much* more difficult to restructure than starting from scratch. Even if someone would be willing to contribute to this projet to help address major technical issues, it would require a huge amount of effort to effect a significant architectural change because of community inertia and backward compatibility requirements. >From what I've seen at Apache, major rearchitecture work always happen as a "revolution" with an entirely new implementation being built and these "revolutions" are dangerous to a project communiy health. Given the frictions created by "revolutions", it's important that these do not happen before the community is mature else they may simply split it. I think my point is simply that in a code grant incubation scenario, initial codebase and initial community *do* matter because they'll act as natural forces towards stability and are likely to shape the community and codebase for a long time. Just my 2 eurocents, -- Raphaël Luta - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache Portals - Enterprise Portal in Java http://portals.apache.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
