Well, if the dependencies never graduate, it's easy to copy the code into
your own project since it is Apache licensed.

> +1 - good idea to start on Wiki and then move web once stable.  I
> think Simon's summary is excellent, but I have one caveat that I would
> throw in under
>
> * Easy for other apache projects to depend on it.
>
> Apache projects should be careful about depending on things in the
> commons sandbox.  Experimenting with the idea of eventual dependency
> (e.g. [chain]), or factoring out code "experimentally" (e.g.
> [resources]) is fine, IMHO, but creating hard dependencies while
> things are still in the sandbox is not a good idea, as there is no
> guarantee that things in the sandbox will ever see an official
> release.
>
> Phil
>
> On 3/8/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think in one of these recent threads, there was talk about coming up
>> with a document that we can point to whenever a new sandbox project is
>> formed / proposed, so Simon doesn't have to type his email each time
>> ;-) (see bottom of this email).
>>
>> A document that aims to strike a balance between:
>>
>>  * The sandbox is truly open to any Apache committer, and there is no
>> need to ask for permission (other than posting a formal [PROPOSAL]
>> email whose outline exists on the website). Who is to say whether or
>> not it will "take off". We need to be welcoming.
>>
>>  * The mechanics of sandbox graduation and releasing, requiring
>> support from enough Jakarta PMC members and so on. Based on recent
>> history, we need to be cautious, and maybe point this out at the
>> onset.
>>
>> Ofcourse, this may change if and when the Jakarta sandbox is formed,
>> interim should be post such a "things to consider" document? On the
>> wiki, on the website?
>>
>> -Rahul
>>
>>
>> On 3/8/06, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 12:46 -0500, James Carman wrote:
>> > > If I write it, I can have the Trails project use it probably (I'm a
>> > > committer).  Do we just have to have clients who are interested in
>> the
>> > > project or do we also need more than one developer to work on it?
>> >
>> > The sandbox is open to anyone; you can just get stuck in. However you
>> > have to consider whether it is more *productive* to host your project
>> > elsewhere (eg sourceforge).
>> >
>> > Benefits of sandbox:
>> > * Existing commons developers are watching.
>> > If you think this project would be of interest to a number of existing
>> > commons developers then it's beneficial to use sandbox as it will make
>> > them aware of the project
>> >
>> > * Easy for other apache projects to depend on it.
>> > Apache projects are generally happier depending on apache-hosted
>> > projects than external projects (though that's not an absolute rule).
>> > In particular, for code factored out of an existing apache project
>> > it makes sense to use sandbox.
>> >
>> > * Easy promotion to proper
>> > When the project has been developed in the sandbox, it's simply a vote
>> > to move it to proper. When developed externally, contributor
>> agreements
>> > etc are probably needed before moving the project *to* apache.
>> >
>> > Disadvantages of sandbox:
>> > * It's very difficult getting non-apache developers committership.
>> > If Sue Smith notices the project and wants to get involved she
>> basically
>> > can't. Only apache committers can have sandbox access, and apache
>> > committership is not something granted lightly. In sourceforge, of
>> > course, the project administrator just adds any user they want.
>> >
>> > * Very low visibility
>> > People can find sourceforge projects much easier than they can find
>> > sandbox projects.
>> >
>> > * Releases
>> > You can't make official releases of a sandbox project before it's
>> > promoted to proper. And it cannot be promoted to proper unless you can
>> > attract at least a couple of other commons committers to work on the
>> > project. This needs very serious thought; if you're not going to get
>> > that support in commons then sandbox is a permanent dead end.
>> >
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Simon
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


James Carman, President
Carman Consulting, Inc.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to