Re: [ecf-dev] org.eclipse.ecf.example.clients & IllegalMonitorStateExcep

[Thomas Hallgren <thomas@xxxxxxx>]

Dann,

On 03/04/2010 01:17 AM, Dann Martens wrote:
> I'm not sure to which questions you are referring which are left dangling,

Questions regarding the openness of the process. Questions like: Why was 
the discussion termination cloaked from the forum? Does the authority 
that performed the termination consider the forum unfit to deal with the 
topic at hand? Is it hurtful to put forward or confront criticism in a 
forum?

> but the discussion about the validity of EMF itself is known to be 
> controversial, and considered inappropriate to be continued on this list.

I would much prefer if that was established in the open. I find it more 
then a little scary when discussions just die out because an authority 
finds something that someone wrote offensive or controversial.

> If any of you would consider to continue this discussion, I invite you 
> to leave it off-line; I'll be happy, make that very happy, to serve 
> you to my counter-arguments.
>
> @Thomas: I know we had a disagreement about EMF in Buckminster, but 
> I'm not aware of your relationship to ECF. Please fill me in, thanks!

Buckminster and p2 are consumers of ECF. I'm a committer on both. I have 
contributed a number of patches to the ECF code base. And as you know, 
ECF is using Buckminster which in itself is a relationship.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren