On 5/23/07, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- Original Message ----
From: Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 5/22/07, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In summary:
> > a) I believe the status quo is not viable
> > b) I believe that merging commons into Jakarta merges two mismatched groups
>
> My suggestion was to merge the Jakarta subprojects into the Commons,
> not the other way around.
Yes, Jakarta subprojects should be invited to join Commons. I'll happily
welcome them to the Commons fold.
But *invited* is the key word. They must not be forced - isn't the ASF about
'community'? For me that means not pushing groups to go where they don't want
to go.
> * The remaining subprojects all seem to be "reusable components"
> within the scope of the Commons charter.
Mostly, but that doesn't mean that they don't have their own communities (even
a community of one). They mustn't be forced to do anything. Encouraged perhaps,
not forced.
> * If the remaining subprojects join the Jakarta Commons, then we could
> then ask the board to re-establish the Jakarta PMC, using the list
> suggested in the draft resolution as the initial PMC.
>
> * The extended Commons group then becomes the new Jakarta PMC.
This seems complicated, political, and unecessary. We have a vibrant community
in Commons, and for some half-arsed reason we seem to be trying to abuse it's
strength to save long-dead Jakarta.
I know some people here have long attachments to 'Jakarta', and the perceived
'brand'. I don't. (At one time I did want to save Jakarta, but then I saw how
much of a disfunctional beast it had become). Jakarta is like a family, where
the children have left home and have their own lives now.
Commons has its own life too. Its own community. And that's independent of
Jakarta. There is no need to have a Jakarta PMC overseeing Commons. In fact, I
object to the fact the it seems to be so difficult to escape Jakarta.
To those trying to preserve Jakarta I say 'let go of Commons'. Don't abuse
Commons to try and save Jakarta. If the Jakarta name is worth saving, people
and community will form to save it. If not, then it will die. Thats normal and
natural.
> In the alternative, without an anchor subproject, or a ready
> initiative to promote Java at Apache, realistically, Jakarta whithers away.
I'd encourage people to step back for a moment and look at what Jakarta
actually is today. Its a very disparate group of voices pulling in different
directions. This is a natural result of the true meaning of Jakarta - the
community around the code - leaving. There is no longer any focus within
Jakarta. Nor has there been for a *very* long time.
Whatever Jakarta becomes once Commons leaves is up to Jakarta, and those who
feel it should exist. Just don't abuse Commons to try and save Jakarta.
I agree that Commons shouldn't be burdoned with solving the Jakarta
issues - it should have its own PMC and be in control of the space it
operates in. Maybe the remaining sub-projects need to do something
similar - put together a TLP proposal - with the idea that they group
togther like Commons (single dev/user mailing list) to give each other
oversight.
Niall
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
