Hello Avik,

> I'd have been happy seeing POI move to a TLP. However, some of the
> comments in this thread seem to preclude that possibility either.  I
> think his leaves the community between a rock and a hard place ... I
> dont want us to be subsumed as a commons project

I don't think that the level at which POI resides will make any
difference. I admit that at the beginning of this thread and
after Andy's first responses I also thought "hey, let's get them
promoted to TLP and we're finally rid of these discussions in
Jakarta". I've since had time to reconsider and realize that
this is not a solution. And actually I don't think that it is
even an option. POI is not running the Apache way. Promoting
it to TLP or "hiding" it in commons will not change anything.
If it were a TLP, you'd be having basically the same discussions
directly with the board. Do you think they'll look more kindly
on failure to follow the established Apache procedures? If we
made a proposal to promote POI now, I would expect the board
to reject it and tell us "make POI work in Jakarta before you
promote it to TLP".

A release can go wrong all right. That this wasn't detected by
the POI community itself is reason for worry. But the kind of
things that went wrong, like files being in the wrong place or
missing is even more reason for worry. The copyright statements
on the POI web site indicate that the project has been around
since 2002. Does that mean that in 4 years nobody cared to write
a build process that generates release jars conforming to
Apache standards?


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to