On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 03:05:10PM -0400, Henri Yandell wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Greg Stein wrote: > >... > > > Would love that balance. I'd also like to see you start to move some > > > projects in :-) > > > > I've got DbUtils in Jakarta Commons which wants to move out. Currently > > it's slated for Db Commons. Should I be thinking of Apache Commons > > instead? Should the DB PMC and the Commons PMC have a quiet word? [Db > > Commons is currently empty I think]. > > Wherever the community wants it to go, but I would *highly* recommend > Apache Commons instead (I'd rather not see a proliferation of Foo Commons > around the ASF). Especially if DB Commons is empty. I've nothing against DB Commons, but it seems that it ought to just be a part of Apache Commons. With the assumption that someday Jakarta Commons will end up as part of Apache Commons. The biggest problem Apache Commons has right now I think is that it doesn't offer anything to the Commons coder. What does Apache Commons have over Xml, DB and Jakarta Commons for me as a consumer. > Who are the committers that would migrate with the code? There are three of us. Though Juozas has taken some of the experimental bits he added and created http://voruta.sf.net. The biggest problem with this, and with quite a few members of Jakarta Commons Sandbox, is that there's not much of a community yet. > > Should it incubate? > > I don't see why. It was built by ASF committers (so it has the right IP > already), who know ASF policy, and all have CLAs on file. That is most of > the purpose of incubation. There is also a bit of "build a community", but > I've never agreed with that part of incubation. I believe that the > community is formed by the Project that the code lives within (i.e. that > would be Apache Commons or Apache DB). The original plan for Jakarta Commons seems to have been that the common-components would come out of the Jakarta projects themselves. So someone would migrate Tomcat's Pool library to Commons and everyone would start using it, but Tomcat would probably remain the main committers on it. Is this the Apache Commons plan? If so, then a lesson needs to be learned from Jakarta Commons. Not long after it got up speed, the projects that were meant to just be reusable compoents for other projects started to gather their own speed. Pretty quickly they were adding their own committers, especially as reusable components are simpler to understand and people use them in more obscure situations than they would a simple(!) java mail server. Thus the concept of 'Commons coders' was born. Jakarta coders who are not on a particular Jakarta project but solely exist because of a re-usable component(s). The next step for these coders is to create more re-usable components. However, these were not created by a Jakarta project, and have no internal community. They don't feel very Apache-y. What's the plan for this? I entered through Jakarta Taglibs, but I'm really a Commons coder, as are many others. The Jakarta Commons charter probably needs changing to reflect this. What's the Apache Commons plans for this? Hen
