Noel, 1st this is probably better suited to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2nd What is your opinion re James as a top-level project?
other points below.. > Good things could come from a reorg, but my own view as a non-insider is > that the interests of outside users (e.g, the potential consuming > developers) should be incorporated into any reorg that is visible > on the web > site(s). This is all under (full and heated!) discussion > If there were to be a reorg, I'd want thought put into semantic > relationships. Yes, things like taglibs and struts can be used with other > servlet engines than Tomcat, but we need to make it easy for > people to find > things and pull them together related technologies. As Serge noted, > increased visibility for specific projects could be a good thing for the > right project(s), but too broad a tree makes it harder to see the > forest for > the trees. There have been discussions on the distinction between external appearances and internal structures, and discussions around the notion of self-categorisation by projects. > FWIW, it might be nice if there were a matchers/mailets > sub-project of James > similar to the taglib (sub-)project. But that can be dealt with after we > address the classloading issues. Yeah, its a long term plan of mine to see mailet seperated off as a fully independant su-project of James, and a project delivering James independant mailets/matchers would align well with this. > > Questions: > > Is there any real infrastructure related issue for reorganizing? > If so, what? Yeah Brian has suggested making Source Cast available to the ASF, there have been other discussions relating to the process of self-categorisation of projects, but its early days. So far the two concrete things to emerge have been the apache-incubator project, and the confirmation that jakarta sub-projects (EG james etc) can petition the board for elevation to project status. > Does the fact that Tomcat isn't on the list reveal an underlying > "jealousy" that Tomcat is the perceived BMOC on the Jakarta > campus, and some people want more mindshare? Isn't it? or is it that TC is obvoius and well represented by foundation members? > > Is this reorg being considered to encourage some projects to > stay, rather than jump ship after having established themselves? No, I believe its come about as a result of a general ill-defined dissatisfaction with the current situation, the size of jakarta, the danger of losing sight of "The Apache Way", and the widespread desire to see Apache *not* become simply a sourceforge. IMO there is no crisis, or definite timescale, but to avert a future crisis, and to have time to ramble through the usual interminable debating, discussions are starting now. > > What would the reorg impose upon projects? AFAIK nothing that was not agreed by projects, PMC's, sub-projects or whomever is the relevant group. > > --- Noel > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
