On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 14:03, Craig L Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com> > wrote: >> I don't care what you call them in the project. I'm asking that you use >> Apache terminology when discussing things among the wider Apache community. > > The report is consumed by the svn community, too. They reviewed it and > provided feedback. It uses terms from the svn community.
Greg, your position is just a pile of BS. You should know it. No way would the Board (nor you) allow arbitrary terminology across projects even if it is "parentheticals" (whatever that means). You would shoot such project down faster than they could type it out in the report. Now, you are so darn protective of this project, for all good reasons, but I think your emotional attachment is clouding your judgment when you are holding fast to this view that projects (at least Subversion!) can change the terminology in board reports because they are too lazy to change. So, instead of bullying the ASF into accepting Subversion as it is, without any need to conform any more than it does by 'default', why not spend a little effort on educating the Subversion community to go with the flow. How fking hard can that be?? Subversion already got more preferential treatment than it should, all because of your bullying tactics. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
