On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 11:36:23PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: > I believe that we can start "testing the waters" as we refine the mission > and rules.
My fear is we start getting into a mob mentality where each decision is taken on its own with less and less of a common goal in mind. > Specifically, I think it would be great to use Serf as a focal > point for discussion. "where does its dev email go?" "where does the code go > in CVS?" etc. We already have a lot of that in STATUS. This kind of focus > really helps identify the things we need to do. Your [Aaron's] addition to > STATUS is in a similar vein -- when we get down to "how do we deal with a > component?" then these issues come right to the fore. I agree, but I think Serf is too fine grained at this point in time. I want to see functional components, not specific projects. This PMC should not be looking at the implementation, it should be looking at the common utility. IMHO, the whole purpose of this Commons PMC is to help foster cross-community development on reusable components. (Hey look, my definition evolved since my last post :) I'm trying to come up with a reason for Serf to coexist rather than just exist, and at the same time make room other projects with similiar goals to live together. > > Nah, I don't think we need a mission for 'HTTP Utilities.' This > >... > > I dunno, but I really would prefer that we just take things and > > evolve as we go. I'm getting awfully tired of dealing with > >... > > from falling apart' in such new endeavors. This proposal strikes me > > as going in a different direction than where I would like to see it. Where would you like to see it go, Justin? Please be specific, since we need a framework to work from. Vague fears of beurocracy are unfair and are not constructive. > Agreed on all that stuff. I left a few key points, but +1 to everything > Justin said. When we start coming up with the bits and pieces that will be under Commons, we have to think how these things will organize. A HTTP Utilities is a sort of container that allows development to cross language barries and meet at a functional or utilitarian level. Here's something to consider: What makes Commons different from APR[UTIL] (besides being language agnostic)? -aaron
