Greg Reddin wrote:
2) Apache Web Components TLP - What components will make up this
list? Who needs to be involved in the discussion? What's the
process to proceed?
This is my preference. I think the next steps would be to follow up
with the other potential projects to see if they are even interested.
The core ones that I'd start talking to are:
- Tiles (Apache)
- Jakarta Commons File Upload (Apache)
- Java Web Parts (SF)
- XAP (Apache Incubator)
I see this as being difficult to get approved, much less operational. I
think we need to have a real convincing argument for all these things to
live together before we head down this road - not just for political
reasons but practical reasons also. I'm not sure how this helps our
community situation. Why would a Web Parts developer start contributing
to Tiles just because they are part of the same TLP. I'm a Struts
committer, but I've contributed very little to anything outside of
Tiles. I'm also a Shale committer, but I've not contributed much to the
other parts of that project yet either. Community doesn't just happen
because we live in the same neighborhood or even the same house. There
has to be a common goal that will cause people to want to work on Tiles
specifically I think. It would make sense to bring Dimensions and
Scopes into a Tiles project. They deal directly with Tiles. People
interested in one will be interested in the other. But the above list
of components just don't have enough in common to build that kind of
community IMO.
Perhaps I'm looking at this too selfishly, but I'm thinking that if
nothing else the teams can help each other with the infrastructure and
burden of being a TLP. For example:
- Moderating Mail Lists
- Board Reports
- Managing Jira
- Community Oversight
- etc. . .
It seems to me like those types of tasks can take a lot of development
time away from a small team. I've heard of PMC Chairs that are consumed
by all of this overhead and stop committing code. I don't ever want to
get to that point and it seems possible considering the fact that there
are only 3 of us - 2 that currently commit code.
That said, I do think there's much more potential for commit overlap
than you give credit. Simply having access to the repo of a sister
project might spawn some interest. I know that I'd be apt to dive into
FileUpload or WebParts if I had commit access. I've used both before
but haven't contributed because the burden was too much for the benefit.
At the same time, while I'm sure Dimensions or Scopes are great, I just
don't have the need for them right now. And because of that, I'd be
less apt to contribute.
In other words, I don't think it's "dependency" that makes people
contribute, I think it's weighing the benefit against the burden. If we
lower the burden for key people, they may come to play.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
