One way to make things more apparent would be to pull the SOAP project under the Axis project (or vice versa). It also might help to provide some indication on the Web site that SOAP and Axis are in some way related to each other. Note that on the http://xml.apache.org main page, Axis is listed in the left column of projects, but it's not listed in the main text (which implies that it isn't an XML sub-project?). (XML Security doesn't appear to be a sub-project either). What this means is that unless someone knows to look for Axis, new-comers will automatically go to the SOAP page and never find the Axis project. There's no mention of Axis either in the SOAP project description on the main page or on the SOAP project page.
It would be useful to have some verbage on the project pages that ties the SOAP and Axis project together -- perhaps a single project page that lists the ongoing SOAP projects. This approach would also easily accommodate another SOAP project (e.g., WASP). Anne > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 2:44 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [POLL] WASP Lite on Apache? > > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > > > > Stefano Mazzocchi writes: > > > > Apache SOAP is destined to become the "old version" and Axis to be > > > > the new and on-going version. > > > > > > I now understand this, but this is *NOT* clear from the outside. > > > > > > We must fix this in some way. > > > > Do you have any suggestions? We (Apache SOAP developers) have repeated > > this a hundred times on the soap-user list for example. > > > > Maybe what we should do is do one last release and then put flashing > > lights on xml.apache.org/soap saying this is it and that the next > > soap impl will be from axis. > > I love this! Yes, IMHO, no matter how many times you tell this to users, > this is not going to be evident from those lurkers (me included!) who > aren't subscribed to that list. > > > The reason for one last release is that > > there have been many bug fixes / improvements over the last six > > months that many would find useful while they wait for Axis to mature > > and stabilize. > > Absolutely. This is what we did for JServ/Tomcat transition and makes > total sense. > > > People building products using this stuff don't like > > to be based on nightly builds obviously. > > I fully understand this (keep in mind that at the time of jserv/tomcat > transition, we had Oracle shipping Jserv into their App Server, so I > know what you're talking about, but for sure this proves it can be > done). > > > We need to make the relationship between Apache SOAP and Apache Axis > > well-known, not just well-defined. I'm all ears on how to make that > > better. > > Look at java.apache.org/jserv/. Top of the page. it clearly shows what > to do: state clearly and loudly what the community wants to do. > > > > Ah, a new PMC. Sam expressed the same intention. > > > > > > >From where I stand, this webservices.apache.org is very > likely to become > > > *the* political battleground around here and, if I'd be happy > to let you > > > guys take care of that yourself, I'm concerned about the initial > > > diversity of the PMC required to bootstrap this community. > > > > > > I don't want to see the old xerces/crimson mess multiplied by an order > > > of magnitude, even if I don't participate in that community in first > > > person. > > > > > > Anyway, I fully trust the Apache Board judgement on this. > > > > You may be right; we should leave this stuff in the XML PMC and > > let you guys deal with the politics ;-). > > :) > > > Maybe the right thing to > > do is let things sit in the XML PMC until things stabilize in the > > Web services space and then (and if necessary) move it to a separate > > PMC. > > My personal perception is that if a new PMC for web services is created, > even finding the necessary people to stand in that PMC in order for > political irritation to be low will be hard, at present. > > So, I totally agree with you that this is probably the wisest solution > right now, even if this is likely to create some overhead of "proposed > codebases" on this list (but we all are willing to tackle it). > > > I am not one to push for unnecessary administrative overhead, > > so if things work ok and if the Web services stuff get well built, > > used and supported, well, then what's there to complain about. > > > > Anyway, I don't think anyone's proposing that a new PMC be created > > right now! (I hope not anyway ..) > > -- > Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be > able to give birth to a dancing star. > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
