On 11/23/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd like to see the proposal discuss the alternatives to becoming a Struts subproject. A good role for a proposal is to summarize various threads. Becoming a subproject seems to be a foregone conclusion of the proposal, with no discussion of the alternatives.
Well, yeah, that's what is being _proposed_. We did discuss the options on the mailing list, more than once, and came to the conclusion that becoming a Struts sub-project was the right interim step. I don't see that we need to have the discussion all over again just because the proposal has been put on the wiki. In previous threads, Jakarta was mentioned, but not so much the
Jakarta Commons. Why is it that we are not proposing to move Tiles to the Commons, as we did with the Validator, and others?
Sigh. We've had this discussion _lots_ of times already, and we've had similar discussions over in Commons. Jakarta Commons is not about web components, and people do not want it to be about web components, which is why the notion of Jakarta Web Components has been bandied about so much. Validator makes sense in Commons because it's not tied to the web; the part that does tie to the web is in Struts, not Validator. I, for one, would not want to propose Tiles as a Commons component, because I'm almost certain it would be rejected, and because I would vote against that myself. Also, Tiles might be able to become a TLP by resolution of the board.
The situation is not much different than Shale. The incubator is charged with "acceptance and oversight of new products submitted or proposed to become part of the Foundation". Tiles is already part of the foundation.
Yes, Tiles might be able to become a TLP, but it is my perception that the people involved are not ready for that. It behooves us to provide better options than either staying in the sandbox or going straight to TLP. That you bring up Shale is interesting; note that we went through exactly the same process with Shale as we are now proposing for Tiles. Shale went from the sandbox to a Struts sub-project first. Only later, once it found its feet as a sub-project, did it go off to TLP land. Speaking of the Incubator, we might also note that Incubator podlings
do have releases. Even without quantifying it as a "release", given the usual release plan, Tiles could still create a tagged test-build. Before deciding whether Tiles should be a subproject or not, I think I'd like to see the volunteers create a test-build that could be a release if the PMC gave the nod.
Why would we introduce a new rule for Tiles that we have never imposed on other projects coming out of the sandbox? Moving a code branch out the sandbox is a trivial task. What's not
trivial is doing everything that's needed to turn a snapshot into a potential release.
True. But that has never before been tied to promoting something out of the sandbox, and I don't think that introducing it in the midst of a proposal, after most of the discussion has already happened on the lists, is a productive thing to do. -- Martin Cooper -Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
