Re: Spice Dependency (was: RE: Spice License)

On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:57, Leo Sutic wrote:
> > The problem occurs because people who don't contribute to a
> > component/area but are more than willing to tell others what
> > to do.
>
> There are times when one should speak up *fast* to stop something,
> or to avert something that may become a future problem.

errr .. like the vetos I have given since I have been back that have been 
completely ignored so far?

> For example, I oppose the Spice dependency as I see it leading to
> future problems - licensing, dependencies, etc. You did much the
> same regarding the Lifecycle-in-Framework discussion.

You misinterpret. I don't really care if lifecycle is part of fortress or not. 
I just don't want it to be part of framework or something I have to support 
at any stage in the future. Technically I think it is crap but if someone 
else wants to support it and implement it then goodluck to em. Best way to 
learn is to do - it is how most people came around to my marker interfaces 
are evil meme :) I may even be wrong and in 6 months could change my mind - 
it has happened before (re legacy/wrapper stuff in framework) but usually I 
have a pretty good track record of spotting crap code.

> Only if the other person is totally
> uninterested in a compromise or in figuring out a solution is there
> a problem. But I haven't seen much of that here.

It only takes one time.

-- 
Cheers,

Peter Donald
---------------------------------------------------
"Therefore it can be said that victorious warriors 
win first, and then go to battle, while defeated 
warriors go to battle first, and then seek to win." 
              - Sun Tzu, the Art Of War
---------------------------------------------------