Hi, I strongly agree with Michael opinion.
Right now (IMHO), the main hurdle which stops graduation is the commiter availability. The project began incubation with 6 committers and grew up to 8 during 2008. But, as time passed, many of us began to not have the time to work in JSPWiki on a regular basis. This is somewhat normal, as JSPWiki is 100% volunteer work. So the first question (IMHO again), rather than where to host JSPWiki, should be: who is willing / has the time to work on JSPWiki (on a regular basis or sporadic commits or submitting patches)? I put my name on this list, as I expect spending a few hours every week, but more importantly, on a regular basis. More hands on here? Second question: releasing. Although trunk is unusable as for today, a lot of effort has been put on 3.0 (new back-end, new web tier, great effort on compatibility with previous versions in terms of URLs, plugins, filters, etc). On the other hand, releasing 2.8.5 as an ASF release may be fastest and more community-like, 2.8 it's well known and battle-tested. So, more opinions? As for the needed reports and other thing needed for graduation, they can be reached at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/jspwiki.html (Incubation section, Project specific subsection). Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but right now, we have to fill in the incubation status reports and little more, no? :-? regards, juan pablo 2012/1/3 Terry Steichen <te...@net-frame.com> > I've been associated with JSPWiki for many years, and early on, made a > number of contributions. > > I felt, however, that the project kept getting more and more complicated > (while adding impressive but - to me - unneeded features). It became > increasingly difficult to maintain, because to get bug fixes (such as > memory leaks), I had to keep upgrading to a new version (with stuff I > didn't need, and often new "Gotchas"). > > I thought - and still think - that the better strategy is to focus on > maintaining a rock-solid platform that is increasingly easy to > understand (aka, documentation for dummies) and use. That's not very > exciting, I grant you. But it's very useful. > > For the past year or so, my personal focus has largely shifted from > adding functionality, to adding data and documentation, so I've been > relatively silent on the technical forum. But I'm very grateful for > Janne, Andrew, Harry, Florian, Dirk, Christope and others who have > contributed so much to this effort. > > Terry Steichen > > PS: I'm still using 2.6.2 and am very satisfied with it (though I've > done a lot of application-level customization to achieve my own > functional objectives). > > > > On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 09:42 +0100, Michael Gerzabek wrote: > > > JSPWikiers, > > > > as I put in my previous mail, it's more about the agendas - the implicit > > and explicit ones - than a question about failure. I don't see that > > incubation failed! There are just to many people out there that do > > interesting things with the software OUTSIDE the JSPWiki repository. And > > let me ask those folks: > > > > Why are you doing this? Why do you fork JSPWiki? What value do you see > > in this? What does it help you achieve? And what direction would the > > trunk of JSPWiki need to evolve, that you would be willing to contribute > > and have the value that you want to get out of JSPWiki? > > > > Anyway. The main task I see is this: Get people back on the train. How > > to approach? Interestingly the steps are similar to the ones Janne > > supposed. > > > > 1.) Radically declare the JSPWIKI_2_8_BRANCH as release. This one does > > have awesome features and is time tested. Future visions should be based > > on that version. > > > > 2.) Prepare the necessary reports. This is where I would be willing to > > learn what's necessary to do if someone is willing to point me in the > > right direction. > > > > 3.) Start a discussion about future ideas and steps. > > > > JSPWiki, the one before 3.0.0, is a mature project. Why bother? > > > > One thought about the host. OS is always about people. And it doesn't > > matter if the repo is on GitHub, sourceforge or somewhere else. Sure. > > But wait a minute. It does matter! > > > > The Apache umbrella brings a widely accepted reputation and has a huge > > user group in the Java world. This all ships for a rather small price - > > the reports. Compare this to the usual GitHub projects. Many of them are > > one-man-shows. The recognition is always just the project alone. No > > umbrella. No synergies. So I strongly argue to do the incubation and use > > the benefits of beeing a TLP Apache project. > > > > just my two cents, > > Michael > > > > > > > > Am 02/01/2012 23:45, schrieb Christophe Dupriez: > > > Dear Janne and core JSPWiki committers, > > > > > > What is the sustainable structure where YOU would still have the > > > energy to be involved ? > > > What would be the goal YOU would pursue? > > > > > > Most of us have their own agenda: the weight of managing a community > > > is bearable only if enough agendas have many things in common... > > > > > > For me, 2.8.4 is a nice base: I modify it for CK support and > > > integration with terminology management and other "details" > > > (example: > > > http://www.destin-informatique.com/ASKOSI/Wiki.jsp?page=jita_THIN ) > > > > > > Your leadership is essential: please do what you can bear. > > > What would be nice is to make a "gallery" of our best "forks" to > > > eventually decide what we put in common in the future. > > > > > > Good night! > > > > > > Christophe > > > > > > Le 2/01/2012 22:50, Janne Jalkanen a écrit : > > >> Folks, > > >> > > >> it seems that we haven't been able to produce an Apache-ready version > > >> of JSPWiki for over three (four?) years now. 3.0 was obviously too > > >> complex to deliver, and it's still badly broken. It would need a lot > > >> of work to refactor into a state where it would actually be usable, > > >> and I don't know whether anyone has the time to do it. So far it > > >> seems that we're not getting a whole lot of new contributors. > > >> > > >> So what I'm proposing is fairly radical: let's forget about Apache > > >> and move over to GitHub. GitHub's contribution model is simpler (pull > > >> requests are easier to create and handle than patches on JIRA > > >> tickets), and we don't have to worry about preparing governance > > >> reports and that sort of stuff. > > >> > > >> The point of Apache Incubation is to incubate a community of people > > >> who can create good software. So far our community seems to be > > >> dwindling more than increasing (and I accept the blame for that - I > > >> just haven't had the time nor the interest to put into this project). > > >> So I don't think it's wrong to say that our incubation has > > >> essentially failed, and that we should consider some other avenue, > > >> and go away from messing up the Apache Incubator. > > >> > > >> Of course, now is the time for people to step up and say that "yes, I > > >> am willing to take charge and turn JSPWiki into a good Apache Top > > >> Level project." :-D I would welcome such people, but I know I don't > > >> have it in me anymore. > > >> > > >> /Janne > > >> > > > > > > >
