I don't want to sound negative but saying: > > Beyond that, the ASF provides legal protection for committers, plus an > incredible brand, not to mention infrastructure, etc. *Rather than write > it up, I'd suggest you go read > http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html and > http://www.apache.org/dev/ and other things.* > > Doesn't look a really friendly approach.... if the ASF provides just the brand (which is big in the Linux/Java world, but almost nil in the .NET one), the infrastructure (I don't know what this is, but if it is just the hosting and the svn and ML, then all the opensource project hosting site provide it with no strings attached), and a set of rules/obligations/laws that cannot be even summed up in an email, then I don't think its really a lot of advantages for the project.
Except for the name, personally I don't see any other reason for really wanting to stay inside the ASF. Or maybe it's the ASF that wants Lucene.Net in to expand their brand also to the .NET world Anyway, whichever direction the current "committers" decide to take, I'm available for help, as long as I can find the time to it, considering that I use only in my personal opensource project. Probably it would be more beneficial if someone that is working for companies that get money from products based on Lucene.Net could ask their company if they can devote part of their paid time on it ( http://blog.wekeroad.com/thoughts/making-bacon-from-lemonade) Simone -- Simone Chiaretta Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber twitter: @simonech Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic "Life is short, play hard"
