This came up on commons-dev when we were discussing the idea:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-commons-dev/200704.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] My reply was: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-commons-dev/200704.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] The hard part, as you pointed out, is that we all know that Jakarta means open source Java. It still shows up on job specs every now and then as its own technology. However from a community point of view, Jakarta is still in many ways the same copy of the Apache it was many years ago and that doesn't fit well into the structure at Apache. Individual communities should be tlps and not be within tlps. The extremely loose direction we're moving in is for the remaining active sub-communities within Jakarta to move to TLP, any nearly active parts to be discussing whether there is a possible new home (for example, Regexp/ORO -> Commons has long been discussed) and for inactive projects to be managed in some way (many of the Taglibs while maybe still used have no future and no development activity for years; ECS is also very maintenance and Slide seems to be slowly heading the same way afaik). That still leaves people stuck in a grey area, and we'll need to figure out what to do there. As we're a bunch of subcommunities, we'll continue to do this in our slow galactic-council way.
From what I've heard - discussion at ApacheCon in Amsterdam was that
we want to continue to do something with the Jakarta name, possibly an open source Java at Apache portal/federation so the old 'Jakarta equals open source Java at Apache' viewpoint can come back :) Of course we might not convince the board on a commons.apache.org, there was something there before and we do have Java in our tlp resolution which may be considered bad. Hope that helps, Hen On 5/8/07, Petar Tahchiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/9/07, Jörg Schaible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 > > Henri Yandell wrote on Tuesday, May 08, 2007 7:20 PM: > > > Sadly a bit too late to make the next board meeting I suspect. > > > > However, here's a vote for Commons to officially request that > > it move to TLP. > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/TLPResolution > > > > Please add your name if you're a Commons developer and haven't added > > your name yet. > > > > [ ] +1 I support the proposal > > [ ] +0 I don't care > > [ ] -1 I'm opposed to the proposal because... > > > > Voting will close in one week. > > > > Hen > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi, I am not a Jakarta commiter, and also vote is not binding, but I want to ask something. What are the benefits for commons of moving to a TLP? Also as I read the official commons intro, it states that commons is a project "focused on all aspects of reusable Java components". So as we all know Jakarta is a devision of Apache, that deals with the Java open-source projects in the foundation, therefore, as I see it, it would be better for commons to stay in the Jakarta. So, maybe I am wrong, but I don't see any direct benefit for commons to move to a TLP. That's why, I have to vote: -1 and ask you to prove me wrong. Thank you all. -- Regards, Petar! Karlovo, Bulgaria. Public PGP Key at: http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
