On 10/7/13 1:20 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > On 10/07/2013 08:30 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 10/7/13 7:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote: >>> Hi SCXML developers/community, >>> >>> We are trying to figure out what the status and activity of SCXML >>> development is, and and/or who in the community might be >>> interested in re-activating it. >>> >>> From the mailing lists and JIRA activity we gather not much has >>> been happening here for a very long time: the last release 0.9 >>> dates back to December 2008 and the last serious code commits to >>> June 2011... >>> >>> Looking back through the history of SCXML, Rahul Akolkar was and >>> pretty much still is the only maintainer of the code but seemingly >>> no longer able or willing to contribute much anymore. >>> >>> So, what to do with Commons SCXML? >>> >>> To put it bluntly, we would very much like to revive the >>> development of SCXML again. >> >> Great. >>> >>> We are working for Hippo (Open Source CMS vendor) and intend to >>> start using SCXML as state machine engine in our product shortly. >>> >>> As the latest release is so old, and based on only Java 1.4, we're >>> looking into using the Java 6 (J6) branch instead. But this branch >>> is still 'work in progress' without any release (but targeted at >>> next major version 1.0). >>> >>> This J6/1.0 branch AFAIK is intended to cover the final SCXML >>> specification [1], but already running quite a bit behind the >>> latest draft of that specification. However, this being a W3C >>> specification, having to wait for it to become final before >>> releasing a next major version of Commons SCXML seems very >>> counter-productive to me... >>> >>> Both myself and Woonsan are Apache committers on several other ASF >>> projects for quite some time, so we know 'how it works'. We would >>> like to get out hands dirty, start contributing on Commons SCXML, >>> and help move it forward towards a more current release. >> >> Great. We give sandbox commit to any ASF committer. Reply with >> your availIds and we can get that done immediately. > Great! > For Woonsan and me that would be 'woonsan' and 'ate'. > >> Commit to >> commons proper requires a little more process, but we can get that >> done easily assuming you want to join us as committers. > We surely do. > And of course we understand and know that becoming commons proper > committers does require more. Which we're willing to provide :) > > Being committers to the Commons sandbox however won't help us much > right now as SCXML already is in commons proper. So unless the > current SCXML J6 branch is 'branched' into the sandbox > (temporarily), we'll have to rely on others to review and commit > our contributions. > > Maybe such a temporary SCXML 'branch' in commons sandbox would be > a way to get started?
If you are willing to work like that to start, that would be simplest. Luc - can you grant these guys sandbox karma? Thanks! > >>> >>> But the question is: is there still anyone out here willing to >>> pick up and review contributions, discuss stuff, etc. >>> >>> Hopefully Rahul can chime in (if still listening) and let us know >>> what his ideas and plans are, or else maybe other active members >>> of the Commons community? >> >> Would be ideal if Rahul is still available / listening; otherwise >> what you can count on is some random help / comments and help with >> the release and build process. > That already would be great. > I've been trying to digest the release and build process as well > as updating the website (which for SCXML is seriously broken in > some areas), which turns out to be non-trivial to say the least ;) > I expect to come up with more detailed questions as well as > patches soon. > > I already opened up a relatively trivial JIRA ticket (SCXML-168), > with patch attached, last week but that hasn't seen a response yet. > But then, neither has many other open tickets for SCXML in quite a > while... > >>> >>> As a minimum we would like to get a Java 6+ compatible version >>> released soon, maybe as a first milestone release towards 1.0, and >>> incrementally add (more) compliance to the current SCXML >>> specification. >>> >>> For this we propose to 'archive' the current stalled trunk (move >>> it to a 0.xx branch or something), promote the current J6 branch >>> to trunk, and then take it from there. Website and documentation >>> fixes would be next to pick up and straighten out and updating the >>> current Maven build. Possibly drop the outdated Ant build as well >>> if nobody really is using or dependening on it anyway. >> >> Sounds reasonable. > Great! > If nobody objects I can propose a more definitive and detailed > plan in a few days through a JIRA tickets and if still considered > reasonable, hopefully someone then can 'execute' it. > >>> >>> As said, we're willing to step up here, but as non committers for >>> Apache Commons we do need a 'handle' to get stuff moving again. >> >> Welcome to commons! > Thanks! > >> >> Phil >>> >>> Thanks, Ate & Woonsan >>> >>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/ >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
