Hola, > An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the > feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
Not going too far: these are good ideas IMHO. > My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them > into > Jakarta Commons, leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta (I know, you didn't think > you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would have the potential to > serve two roles: > > 1) Place for [EMAIL PROTECTED] to share conversation [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 2) Place for [EMAIL PROTECTED] to share code [Jakarta Commons] Why Jakarta Commons and not just Jakarta? I thought either move to a TLP or be a normal jakarta project as the two options, essentially making Jakarta itself a Commons of sorts. > Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would > help > bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the Commons > community would make good stewards for the code if the various owners > departed. We need to keep in mind that commit access to specific spec modules may be restricted in a manner slightly different than the usual Jakarta way, e.g. to only members of the relevant Expert Group. (For example, not all Tomcat committers can modify jakarta-servletapi-5). > Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to > rejuvenate > Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP specs could be > stored there too. Nice. Some OASIS stuff comes to mind. -- Yoav Shapira System Design and Management Fellow MIT Sloan School of Management Cambridge, MA, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.yoavshapira.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
