On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 17:09, David M Johnson wrote: > On Mar 3, 2006, at 6:40 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > > > On 3/3/06, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 15:16, Sean Gilligan wrote: > >>> Allen Gilliland wrote: > >>> > >>>> that's fine. we don't have to remove it from the release > >>>> itself, but i do still think that we should move the code out > >>>> into it's own unique project space. > >>>> > >>> > >>> How would this fit in with the move to ASF? > >> > >> that i'm not sure about. i don't have any problems with managing > >> it as an independent module of the Roller project, but i think it > >> could be its own project as well. > > > > Would it be a different community of committers? I suspect it's > > largely the same people as commit to Roller. I'm +1 on continuing to > > grow it within Roller at the moment, once it can be deployed > > independently it'll either become popular on its own or build its own > > community, or it'll turn out that no one wants to do that anyway. > > > > Whoa! > > I'm totally against the idea of breaking Planet out into a separate > Apache project with it's own set committers. I was thinking more > along the lines of "IDE project file." This is a code organization > and build script thing, not a people thing, right? > > You weren't proposing a whole new Apache project were you Allen? > > The Apache Roller project can certainly ship different modules or > applications like Roller Admin Console, Roller Planet Server or even > Roller Blog Client.
Nope, that's not what I was suggesting. I am more than happy to keep it as part of the Apache Roller project and just keep it in its own place, like the way the sandbox works. I suppose the one nice thing about it being its own project is that then it would be easier to recruit interest in it, but that's not what my original intentions were. -- Allen > > - Dave > > > > Hen >
