I actually have enough of a C++ background that I could oversee incoming patches. My problem is that I have been consumed with Log4j. However, if it is only a few patches I could probably find the time. At the same time, I would not be wanting to be the one to do the releases.
Ralph On May 4, 2013, at 10:45 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The attic step seems like potentially unnecessary work. >> >> If the project is being used but not developed actively, that's fine. It is >> still an asset. >> >> I thought Apache already had a process by which a project can be mirrored >> with Git? >> >> You can then process pull requests as you would with any Git repo. >> >> It might be that the project as is is doing it's job in a manner that >> satisfies its users, without further tweaking ;) > > Definitely an interesting idea. Just want to mention, it was the Board > which has asked me. > So far I can't judge on the incoming patches; I have no clue on c++ > nor do I plan to build up the skills. > I thought this would maybe not be enough to make changes in an ASF > repository. I have applied a few > patches recently but it made me a bit uncomfortable. > > In addition, we wouldn't have an PMC member which actually would > oversee the incoming patches. And who is actually supposed to vote on > it? > > That said it is unlikely that we can make up a community again. > > As I understood it, this is when the attic comes into play. Unused > repositories which do not get any maintenance. They are still readable > though and can be used. > > Anyway, creating a GIt mirror for log4cxx sounds reasonable despite > all concerns. It is a small, first step. We can then see what happens. > Maybe when I find some time I will have a chat with the attic people. > Actually I am also a bit afraid before the extra work without real > benefit. > > Thanks! > Christian > > > >> Gary >> >> >> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Rhys Ulerich <rhys.uler...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Most of them >>>> said they might apply a couple of patches here and there, but nobody >>>> burst out in emotions saying, YAY, this is it. >>> >>> The library is, more or less, stable and feature complete. There's >>> not much shepherding to be done in terms of driving the functionality >>> in some particular direction. That is, unless there's some burning >>> feature set that folks need that hasn't been discussed on the log4cxx >>> mailing list in the years that I have been lurking. The problem seems >>> to be that the overhead of contributing small fixes is off-puttingly >>> high. It's hard to elicit a YAY from anyone under these >>> circumstances. >>> >>>> For now I would like to propose that I am cloning log4cxx to my GitHub >>>> account and move the svn repos to the attic. That way I can overlook >>>> if there is a team growing around log4cxx or not. Also I can ask for >>>> ICLAs before accepting pull requests, which should help when we go >>>> back to incubation. If there is, we can go back to incubation at any >>>> time. If there is not, then well, no harm done. >>>> >>>> Comments? >>> >>> I like this approach. >>> >>> I would ask that, before you do this, you please make one last 10.2 >>> release off the Apache-blessed sources. Trunk differs in slight but >>> important ways from 10.1 (e.g., it builds). This way the distro >>> package managers can at least get one last blessed version into their >>> pipelines before the log4cxx community goes off and experiments with a >>> reboot. >>> >>> - Rhys >> >> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition >> Spring Batch in Action >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > > -- > http://www.grobmeier.de > https://www.timeandbill.de
