Good recommendation, Michael. I've gone ahead and started the process by making the wiki page at:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Lucene.Net%20Proposal Thanks, Troy On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Michael Herndon <mhern...@o19s.com> wrote: > You might want to push it back a week later than that. Some take extended > vacations during the week of new years. (*shogatsu* or *oshogatsu) *is > pretty popular in japan, Some people take extra days off to account for > having to spend time with family during christmas etc. > > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Troy Howard <thowar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Scott, >> >> We should communicate on the public list as much as possible. I'll put >> together the draft proposal today, post it here, and ask for feedback >> from both the Lucene PMC and the community. We will wait over the >> weekend and Monday to allow people who might have additional input the >> opportunity to either see this at home or at work. >> >> On Tuesday (Jan 4th) we will move forward with whatever our best >> effort has produced and go from there. >> >> Thanks, >> Troy >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Lombard, Scott >> <slomb...@kingindustries.com> wrote: >> > >> > From everything that was said it seems apparent to me that the only way >> for Lucene.Net to stay alive is to move back to incubation. So where do we >> go from here? More than 4 people have said they are willing to be >> committers. Is this email list the best place to start working on a >> proposal, should it be done between a small group offline or is there a way >> that the community can work on it together? >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > Scott >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thowar...@gmail.com] >> > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 2:22 PM >> > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> > Cc: lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org >> > Subject: Re: RE: Vote thread started on gene...@lucene.apache.org >> > >> > Marco, >> > >> > I agree with you on this front. I feel that the first tasks that a new >> > Lucene.Net team should focus on, in terms of development are: >> > >> > - Fully automating a line-by-line port using a tool such as Sharpen. >> > This needs to become a commodity function requiring very little >> > development effort >> > - Bring the existing forks back in as branches within the ASF project. >> > I am very interested in pursuing continued development on a more .NET >> > style port (i.e. the Lucere project I started or Aimee.Net >> > >> > The Lucene.Net project should be able to continue with both >> > development paths in the same project. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Troy >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Marco Dissel <marco.dis...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> What will be the goal of new committors? Convert the source into .net >> style >> >> code? If yes, we should try to stop will all the spin-offs and >> concentrate >> >> all the development in one project. >> >> Op 30 dec. 2010 19:02 schreef "Lombard, Scott" < >> slomb...@kingindustries.com> >> >> het volgende: >> >>> Grant, >> >>> >> >>> Thanks for your time explaining all the details. I will be willing work >> on >> >> a proposal to put Lucene.Net back in to incubation. I will need other >> people >> >> to step up and be committers as well. Heath has volunteered and as Grant >> has >> >> stated 4 committers are needed to for incubation. Who else is willing to >> be >> >> a committer? >> >>> >> >>> Grant I will definitely be taking you up on your offer to help on bring >> >> Lucene.Net into incubation. >> >>> >> >>> Scott >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org] >> >>> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 12:32 PM >> >>> To: lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org >> >>> Subject: Re: Vote thread started on gene...@lucene.apache.org >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Dec 30, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Heath Aldrich wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Hi Grant, >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks for taking the time to respond. >> >>>> >> >>>> While I have developed extensively against Lucene.net, I do not >> possess >> >> the java skills needed to do a port of the code... So, while I wouldn't >> mind >> >> being a committer, I do not think I am qualified. (I guess if I was, I >> could >> >> just use Lucene proper and that would be that) >> >>>> >> >>>> As to other duties of a committer, I think the ASF is perceived as a >> >> black box of questions for most of us. >> >>>> >> >>>> For one, I don't think anyone outside the 4 committers even understand >> >> *why* it is a good thing to be on the ASF vs. CodePlex, Sourceforge, >> etc. >> >> Maybe if there was an understanding of the why, the requirements of the >> ASF >> >> would make more sense. I think a lot of us right now just perceive the >> ASF >> >> as the group that is wanting to kill Lucene.net. >> >>> >> >>> I don't think we have a desire to kill it, I just think we are faced >> with >> >> the unfortunate reality that the project is already dead and now us on >> the >> >> PMC have the unfortunate job of cleaning up the mess as best we can. >> Again, >> >> it is not even that we want to see it go away, we on the PMC just don't >> want >> >> to be responsible for it's upkeep. You give me the names of 4 people who >> are >> >> willing to be committers (i.e. people willing to volunteer their time) >> and I >> >> will do my best to get the project into the Incubator. However, I have >> to >> >> tell you, my willingness to help is diminishing with every trip we take >> >> around this same circle of discussion. >> >>> >> >>> Simply put, given the way the vote has gone so far, the Lucene PMC is >> no >> >> longer interested in sustaining this project. If the community wishes to >> see >> >> it live at the ASF then one of you had better step up and spend 20-30 >> >> minutes of your time writing up the draft proposal (most of it can be >> copied >> >> and pasted) and circulating it. In fact, given the amount of time some >> of >> >> you have no doubt spent writing on this and other related threads you >> could >> >> have put together the large majority of the proposal, circulated the >> draft >> >> and got other volunteers to help and already be moving forward in a >> positive >> >> direction. Truth be told, I would do it, but I am explicitly not going >> to >> >> because I think that if the community can't take that one step to move >> >> forward, then it truly doesn't deserve to. >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> I get your comments about the slower than slow development, but that >> is >> >> also somewhat of a sign that it works. While 2.9.2 may be behind, it >> seems >> >> very stable with very few issues. If we send the project to the attic, >> how >> >> will anyone be able to submit bugfixes ever? Frankly, I use 2.9.2 every >> day >> >> and have not found bugs in the areas that I use... but I'm sure they are >> in >> >> there somewhere. >> >>>> >> >>>> As for the name, I thought Lucene.net was the name of the project back >> in >> >> the SourceForge days... >> >>>> So my question is based on the premise that "if the lucene.net name >> was >> >> brought *to* ASF, why can the community not leave with it?" >> >>> >> >>> Again, IANAL, but just b/c it was improperly used beforehand does not >> mean >> >> it is legally owned by some other entity. The Lucene name has been at >> the >> >> ASF since 2001 and Lucene.NET is also now a part of the ASF. (If your >> >> interested, go look at the discussions around iBatis and the movement of >> >> that community to MyBatis) >> >>> >> >>> -Grant >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the >> >>> use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may >> >>> contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or >> >>> constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient >> >>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or >> >>> distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, >> >>> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, >> >>> please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting >> >>> it from your computer. Thank you, King Industries, Inc. >> >> >> > >> > >> > This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the >> > use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may >> > contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or >> > constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient >> > you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or >> > distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, >> > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, >> > please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting >> > it from your computer. Thank you, King Industries, Inc. >> > >> > > > > -- > Michael Herndon > Senior Developer (mhern...@o19s.com) > 804.767.0083 > > [connect online] > http://www.opensourceconnections.com > http://www.amptools.net > http://www.linkedin.com/pub/michael-herndon/4/893/23 > http://www.facebook.com/amptools.net > http://www.twitter.com/amptools-net >
