I'm also +1 I think a new TLP seems like a good idea. Felix is already pretty big - I think it would be unmaintainably large if we added all of our components too - and I can't really see any other projects that would be a reasonable fit for what we've been developing.
Regards, Tim ---------------------------------------- > Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:41:17 +0100 > Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduation > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > Hi, > > First off I agree +1. > > Second of all I vote for a new TLP. I think if we move into an > existing project we risk making that other project an uber project. > Also I am not sure what other project we would move into. > > Third I am not sure what the issue really is around an uber project. > In any case we didn't argue for Clerezza to become part of aries when > it was proposed last year and that was very soon after we were > launched, so clearly those involved have an idea of scope. I'm not > sure we should remove the term "Enterprise" because we are aiming to > do things related to the OSGi Enterprise spec, so we need that to hook > in. However we clearly aren't insisting everything in the Enterprise > OSGi spec be done here as that would mean we would attempt to move or > implement DS, ConfigAdmin and many others which are already in felix. > > Alasdair > > On 13 October 2010 14:48, Jeremy Hughes wrote: > > There have been a few murmurings on the list about graduation. I > > thought I'd kick of a specific discussion around whether to graduate > > at all, whether to ask another TLP to take us, or go to a new TLP of > > our own. After discussion has been had, we'll vote on another thread. > > > > We've carried out 2 releases, added 6 committers. Our mailing lists > > have grown in popularity [1], and we have projects using our > > components: JBoss OSGi, Apache Geronimo, Apache Karaf. Equally we're > > using components from many other projects (as can be seen in our > > poms). We have some good information on our website, although > > naturally it can be improved. I think we're at a point where, with > > just a little work, we would be ready to achieve graduation from the > > Incubator. > > > > The graduation checklist according to the graduation guide [2] is: > > > > 1. Preparations > > * Complete (and sign off) tasks documented in the status file > > [most if not all of this is done, but the status page [3] isn't up to > > date - I'm going through this] > > > > * Demonstrate ability to create Apache releases > > [we've had two releases] > > > > * Demonstrate community readiness > > [we've recruited users, developers, committers and PMCers - see news > > section in the status. We've taken collective action and general > > achieved what is set out in the 'community readiness' section] > > > > * Ensure Mentors and IPMC have no remaining issues > > [the only remaining issue I'm aware of is the one highlighted in our > > section of the Incubator board report: "Address project scope concerns > > raised during acceptance vote". These concerns can be found here: > > > > 'But I expect the project to clarify its focus, and demonstrate > > collaboration with other Apache projects using OSGi during > > incubation.' (Bertrand Delacretaz) > > http://markmail.org/message/r6adtazpj66jppes > > > > 'If it IS a goal to become a large component registry for "anything > > OSGI enterprisey"' (Niclas Hedhman). > > http://markmail.org/message/wnbcwgu6mvli5icy > > > > 'From the get-go, this appears headed towards an umbrella project. > > Too many ways to justify "yeah, this belongs here" and far too > > few ways to justify "nope, this doesn't quite fit in". So > > whether TLP or part of Felix (as was the discussion), this appears > > too comprehensive.' (Jim Jagielski) > > http://markmail.org/thread/54b7ohg7cde5u5yt > > > > (have I missed any?) > > > > *If* we are to go to our own TLP then we would need a charter that > > satisfies these concerns. We set out to build the components to enable > > Enterprise Applications (by which I mean a la JEE but running in OSGi) > > which I think we have made great progress towards, as a community. I > > think we have demonstrated the scope of what we set out to achieve, we > > just need the words to describe it.] > > > > 2. Decide upon destination > > [Options are a new TLP or join an existing TLP. I, for one, would like > > to frame a charter for a new TLP that is focused enough to satisfy the > > concerns above. I think the word Enterprise has been contentious and > > we should either define what we mean by it (my preference) or choose > > another word.] > > > > 3. Prepare a resolution (top level candidates only). > > 4. Subproject acceptance VOTE by destination Project (subproject > > candidates only) > > 5. Incubator PMC (IPMC): > > * For top level candidates, this is a recommendation VOTE > > * For subproject candidates, this is a graduation approval VOTE > > So actually perhaps this isn't a Graduation discussion, but a > > Recommendation discussion :-) > > > > 6. Final hand-over > > 7. Consider post graduation tasks > > > > Please comment freely. > > > > [1] http://pulse.apache.org/#aries-dev_at_incubator.apache.org > > [2] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html > > [3] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/aries.html > > > > Thanks, > > Jeremy > > > > > > -- > Alasdair Nottingham > [email protected]
