On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:30:11 -0500, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's correct Phil. They're not against a J-C as a TLP.
>
> I'm pretty sure that if we were to goto othername.apache.org, then we
> will have no problems unless othername is considered too abstract I
> guess. It seems hard for us to come up with a meaningful name that
> doesn't use the word 'java' due to trademark reasons, and isn't too
> abstract though. jcommons.apache.org, commonsj.apache.org are the only
> ones that ever jump out.
>
> We also have the package name thing to think about. All of our code is
> designed to be imported, unlike say Tomcat or Velocity where it is a
> minority who would be importing a class, so we have a huge issue if we
> choose to change the package name structure.
This is indeed a huge issue. IMO, we simply cannot afford to change
the package naming. There is just too much code out there in the world
that is built against what we have now. (And that might be as good an
excuse as any to push for the Apache Commons name, since we already
use org.apache.commons - no Jakarta in sight.)
> We have an issue in terms of sibling projects to go with us. ECS,
> Regexp, ORO have often been talked about in terms of having a Commons
> future, and HttpClient/Math are planning to leave at some point. The
> latter is a larger issue, where do they go from a TLP?
That depends on their reasoning for wanting to leave in the first
place. If they moved out today, they would no doubt become separate
Jakarta subprojects. If they stayed put and Commons went TLP, they
would still be a subproject of a TLP.
The difference might be in other things like mailing lists. Each
Jakarta subproject has its own mailing lists. If Commons went TLP,
would we do the same? Personally, I would hope not. While the Commons
lists are high volume at times, I believe the shared lists are what
makes Commons a community. Without that, I don't see Commons
sustaining the same energy as it has for years now.
Still, if Commons went TLP, there is no reason that HttpClient or Math
couldn't move out and over the Jakarta, and become their own Jakarta
subprojects. (If that's what they would like, though, it would
probably make more sense to do that *before* Commons went TLP, rather
than after.)
> I believe that if we were prepared to adjust the charter to be
> language neutral, then we would have a lot of support to take
> commons.apache.org, though there would be some nay-sayers and it's
> hard to say who'd be in the majority, but it might be worth finding
> out.
>
> My personal vote is that we either consider a language-neutral
> commons.apache.org, or we wait until such a time as Jakarta is so
> empty that Commons can move every component to SLP and 'inherit'
> Jakarta. :)
I like the latter, actually. Jakarta Commons is a brand now, whether
we like it or not. The Java world knows to come here when looking for
components to help them get their job done. Their are multiple books
on Jakarta Commons now. We're famous. ;-)
That's not to say that other Jakarta ${subproject}s aren't well known,
but I'd much prefer to keep Commons the place for Java developers to
come, rather than dilute it with other languages, making it less
focussed on, and for, the Java developer.
> There is one difference between a need for a Tomcat TLP and a need for
> a Commons TLP. The current chair (3rd person at 9am is so beautifully
> pretentious) is a poor representative of Tomcat as they are a very
> active community and he has limited involvement with them as a
> community; however said current chair does pay a lot of attention to
> commons-dev and commons-user :)
>
> That said, Brett is right in his email that we need to become more
> active in managing the health of Commons.
>
> There was one suggestion that we could effectively TLP but retain the
> same customer view; that is Apache Jakarta-Commons coud be a TLP in
> which the name Jakarta-Commons has only typographical links to Jakarta
> (and we'd be on the Jakarta site if Jakarta PMC agreed). It's the
> first time I've heard this suggestion, and would have been superb 2
> years ago when the migration started, but it's an option.
This is similar in some ways to Jakarta as a federation - which has
been mentioned before. I'd be interested in hearing how the XML
federation is going. Anyone know how successful, or otherwise, that
change has been?
> Another option is the Jakarta PMC ^ Commons committers. Those J-C
> committers who are on the PMC could just start talking and calling
> votes etc on this list. The whole point of having 3 pmc members per
> subproject, or component in our case, is to allow for such a thing and
> I see no reason for us not to use community set-theory to end up with
> the equivalent of a J-C PMC immediately, providing we report results
> back to the central PMC on [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's probably what Jakarta
> subprojects should have been doing for the last year and I'm hitting
> myself for not thinking of it then :) I'm not aware of any ruling that
> PMC decisions have to be forged on a general@ list.
I guess I'm not understanding what you mean here. We already call all
the votes here, and report the results to the Jakarta PMC. What are
you proposing that's different from that?
--
Martin Cooper
> We've actually been doing this across Jakarta whenever we have a vote,
> but I think we've been quite focused on the PMC being where
> non-release/non-nomination votes get held.
>
> As I said, 9am so treat this as an early morning brain-dump (yep, I'm
> that late for work).
>
> Hen
>
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:00:25 -0500, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The first thing to decide is do we want to go TLP. Lets not get hung
> > up on the name. My read of Hen's post is that the board is not
> > against a TLP based on what is now Jakarta Commons, so if we want to
> > go TLP they will at least consider it (without forcing us to expand
> > scope). So, all those in favor....
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:16:31 +0000, Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Er, I thought the basis of the board's objections as outlined by Henri
> > > earlier was that commons.apache.org as a Java-only repository is a
> > > no-no....
> > >
> > > "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Are we ready for this?? If others agree, I am willing to draft a
> > > > proposal. Before doing that, I would like to make sure that others
> > > > feel that now is a good time to take this step and also get some
> > > > feedback on the basics:
> > > >
> > > > Scope - slightly edited from the current charter, removing the reference
> > > > to server products and to Jakarta:
> > > >
> > > > "The subproject shall create and maintain packages written in the Java
> > > > language, designed to be used independently of any larger product or
> > > > framework."
> > > >
> > > > Initial Committers - all current j-c committers
> > > > Initial PMC - Jakarta PMC ^ j-c committers
> > > >
> > > > Name - Apache Commons
> > > >
> > > > The last item might be contentious, but I think we should try to keep
> > > > the name. My second choice would be "Jakarta" but that is (still ;-)
> > > > taken.
> > > >
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.*
> > > Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit http://home.eircom.net/broadbandoffer
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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]
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
