On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:37:31 -0300, Lenny Primak <[email protected]>
wrote:
As much as I hate to say it, just like with the book idea, the Tapestry
ecosystem isn't big enough
to have an 'endorsed by' program or any kind of certification. Wish it
wasn't so but it is.
It's not about certification. It's about people thinking, for example,
that Tapestry 5 doesn't support portlets even when a third-party module
written by at least one committer already does it. It's just about us
saying something in the lines of "this isn't part of the Tapestry project
itself, but you can trust it because we do and we use it". It would have
just a handful of modules such as tapestry-security, tapestry5-portlets
plus some other ones, specially the ones that are widely used and written
by at least one Tapestry committer. I wouldn't even submit my own
tapestry-rss, tapestry-wymeditor and tapestry-syntax-highlighter to it,
just tapestry-url-rewriter, because it used to be part of Tapestry itself
and has good test coverage. In addition, it's used in production in many
sites I've worked on, both personal projects and work ones.
For example, let's take CDI support. There are at least 3
implementations, with equal quality as far as I know.
Who is going to be the judge which one gets the stamp of approval?
If all three are good (I haven't used them) and have extensive code
coverage, them all three could get the stamp of approval. The same level
of quality we expect from Tapestry itself would be expected to this
recommended modules.
PMC? All committers? Users of the list?
I've already said what my answer to the question above: a standard Apache
Software Foundation vote, so everybody can give their opinion, but only
the PMC members get binding votes.
Do you think all three should get approval?
Do you think people are actually going to take a look at all the
modules, really take a look at them for quality?
I think people should just approve what they already use. No one would be
forced to review anything. I don't use CDI, so I wouldn't vote on any of
its integrations with Tapestry.
Thiago, as far as your own modules, I think you are doing great work,
and you should put 'Tapestry Committer and PMC member' with your modules.
(at least I think you are :)
That should carry more than enough weight with people.
Good idea. :)
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
