Hello. Le ven. 12 juin 2020 à 13:51, Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > 1. How can a project *** becomes commons-***, or how did a commons-*** > project started? What is the actual procedural?
For new components, this list would be the place to make the proposal. A discussion would decide if "Apache Commons" is the right place (given the interest/capacity of the current team). > 2. How are commons projects related? They are not necessarily related. Usually it is considered a feature if a component has zero dependency (as it is was easier to avoid "JAR hell"). However, there are also drawbacks, e.g. duplicating functionality (and work) needed by several components. > Are they under a same (or at least > similar) management mechanism? Or just sharing a common prefix? Do you mean the development tools (maven, git)? There some measure of "standardization" through the parent POM file, but nothing is really enforced. The code style depends on the regular contributors (and how old the codebase was when it was considered "mature"). > 3. How is commons projects' version control, based on function or based on > time? A backward-compatible release has its minor version number increased; otherwise both the major number and the base package are changed. > 4. Why some projects are on svn, some on gitbox, and some on github? All actively developed components were (will be) moved to "gitbox" (decision made a few years ago, cf. "dev" M archive). Those remaining on SVN are probably mainly "dormant" (except perhaps for some security fix). IIUC, a "GitHub" mirror is automatically created for every new "gitbox" Apache project. > 5. What problems shall be put on mailing list, and what problems shall be > put on Jira? ML: proposal, discussion on design, ... JIRA: identified bugs (with references and/or unit test), accepted feature, discussion on implementation details, ... > 6. Is there quite some dead projects in commons? And how to detect/mark > them? Depends on the definition of "dead". None of the components in "proper" are considered dead, even if they are not actively developed anymore (whether this is "good" or "bad" is another question). I haven't seen anything in "sandbox" being developed for a long time (until the last few days where "Commons Graph" seems it may be revived). Unless I'm mistaken, a project in "dormant" has been subject to decision for stopping its development. > 7. What is the general waiting time for a pr to be reviewed(and rejected or > accepted)? In my own observation the waiting time is between [1 days, 1.5 > years) , is it a little...large? It boils down to the level of involvement of a committer for the component being the target of the PR. Developers being volunteers, it certainly also depends on the balance between the usefulness of the PR and the work required from the reviewer. > 8. What should we do when we have a pr delayed for a long time? And how > long is thought to be an unusual long time for waiting? 3 days.1 week,or 1 > month? They might have been forgotten, or there may other issues. Examples? > > Sorry for having so many questions, but I'm just very curious. Hope the above answers have helped. Regards, Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
