Why don't we fork this effort into two projects :
1) A central resource 'repository', as envisioned by Costin (and
others).
2) A central component 'Catalog', as envisioned by myself (and others).
We are spending so much time going back and forth like this, and I just
don't see that we are ever going to make either camp happy. Every time I
read things like below, I realize how orthogonal each vision is.
I am not trying to be devisive - I just think that we are in some ways
talking apples and oranges.
I see trememdous value to both, btw, both to the developer community,
and in the 'repository', in exploring changes to the Jakarta committer
model.
I just don't have time for both right now until I get independantly
wealthy, or someone offers me a full-time job to do Jakarta/OS stuff.
geir
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > How about this:
> >
> > + New packages may be proposed to the library general list, and voted on
> > by all the subproject committers. To be accepted, a package proposal
> > must receive a positive 3/4's vote of the subproject
> > committers. Proposals are to identify the scope of the package, the
> > initial source from which the package is to be created, the ASF products
> > that might use the package, the mailing list(s) if any which are to be
> > created, and the initial set of committers.
>
> How about this:
>
> + Jakarta projects may also share existing packages by a 3/4 vote on the
> (origin) project, with at least 3 "commited" +1. The projects shared by
> jakarta projects do not need 3/4 aproval on the library list.
>
> After all the original project knows the most about the contributed
> package, and should be allowed to share ( after the contribution the
> component becomes shared and under the control of library ).
>
> Costin
>
> >
> > + Anyone may propose a new package to the library and list themselves
> > as the initial committers for the package. The vote on the proposal is
> > then also a vote to enter new committers to the subproject as needed.
> >
> > > voting +1 means I will contribute to it or just I'm fine if someone else
> > > contribute?
> >
> > Good question --
> >
> > Sam -- how do the PMC votes on new subprojects work? Would we vote +0 to
> > approve only and +1 to approve and commit? Or is it just thumbs-up
> > thumbs-down.
> >
> > Which begs another question in the Apache HTTPD and Jakarta guidelines
> > -- is
> > +0 a "positive" vote?
> >
> > > Can you finalize the lib003.htm into a "goals of the project" "rules"
> > > "components requirements and guidelines" ?
> >
> > Sure!
> >
> > > So I'd say "new packages are accepted if they meet ... requirements, are
> > > voted +1 by 3/4' of committers and there are at least three volunteer
> > > that will take care of it.
> >
> > I'm not sure if we need 3 whole committers for a package ... comments?
> >
> > The 3 is an arbitrary quorum Apache adopted since not everyone is always
> > available. For a package, I would make the quorum 3 or all the
> > committers, whichever is less.
> >
> >
> > =T.
> >
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
