On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Thomas Dudziak wrote:
On 3/7/06, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Dudziak wrote:
Could you elaborate a bit on what the physical / visual-to-users
differences to the current commons, well, Jakarta sub-project will be
? Will this be a new Jakarta sub-project (and the other commons
components will remain in the current commons one) ?
I've been trying to dodge this question. Why? Because I want to
encourage other groupings (especially from commons) to self-select. If I
make a proposal, then it will be an imposition.
My hope is that in a few months we will have a mentality of working on
*Jakarta* components, not working on commons (or any other) components.
To achieve this will require other groupings.
Note: I suspect that some Jakarta sub-projects, perhaps POI, Turbine and
Velocity, may have real issues with this whole grouping philosophy. My
answer is to *not* force communities that are truly content with the
status quo to change.
Each grouping will have:
- a bland name (Jakarta Xxx Components)
- an identity (how and why does the group exist)
- sufficient size (to be active not inactive)
- mailing lists (one ML for all Jakarta doesn't work)
- SHARE COMMON ISSUES on a shared ML, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I will say is that its too early to worry about website issues. For
now, all we need to know is that there will be a link somewhere to each
component, and probably a single page describing each group. Pages such
as release procedures etc are Jakarta-scoped and discussed on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I understand this, but I wonder whether this move will have an
immediate negative effect on the other Jakarta components in terms of
developer attention both to the projects and to the users. As you say,
probably not so much for the direct Jakarta sub-projects like
Velocity, but for the other commons components.
We need to be thinking about similar things for the other components too.
As a side note, perhaps this is an opportunity to evaluate if there
are better homes for some of the components ? E.g.
betwixt/digester/jxpath could benefit from going to XML commons, dbcp
and dbutils from going to DB etc. ?
+1, except are we going to see community go with them? I don't think we
should be dumping code over the wall so we don't have to worry about it
any more.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
