Well, after a bit more thinking - I do agree that something is wrong in
the proposal.
But that's the fact that the commons commiters can vote and release to the
public a component that is developed by a small group, and the vote
involves people who can't provide any guarantee for the quality of the
product or the future maintainance.
So if you are worried about the Apache brand - probably we should remove
the possibility for commons to release components - the only people that
can vote for a components are those involved in the development and
maintainance of the component.
On the other side jakarata projects who use a component and support it as
part of their product do have the knowledge and can insure the quality of
the product.
If you work on a DBCP I don't see how can you vote and promise support for
a ThreadPool - since commons will be composed of many subprojects you
can't expect everyone to be involved with all components.
Costin
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Ted Husted wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > What's the problem ? Is the library the guardian of Apache quality, the
> > only absolut experts in components ? Are jakarta projects some stupid
> > entities who can't be trusted to release something to the public ?
>
> The problem is that the sandbox is not a subproject, it is a CVS
> repository.
>
> The ASF has deputized Jakarta subprojects to release products using the
> Apache brand.
>
> Before a product is released to the public, it must receive majority
> approval of all the committers to that product. This is our fail-safe.
>
> In the Commons, packages are being developed in small groups, but the
> entire subproject still has to sign-off on a release. The packages will
> be versioned, and safe to use by other products.
>
> If the codebases you want to develop here are to be released and
> distributed by one or more subprojects, as part of their codebase, then
> I believe everyone is fine. But I believe the point of distribution has
> to be one (or more) of the subprojects, or this may not be a legal use
> of the Apache brand.
>
> Of course, if Roy Fielding were to say otherwise, then I would have no
> qualm.
>
> -Ted.
>
