On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Hi, I didn't reply to the whole list of lists to which this was posted, > > but I wanted to see if anyone in the XML-RPC project has a better angle > > on this than I do. > > > > What does this all mean in English? This seems to be the tail end of a > > long thread from some other list. How is this going to affect the > > XML-RPC project? > > How many members of the XML PMC do you believe are actively monitoring > and participating in the development of this project? If you said zero, > then this is a problem. There are multiple ways to address this. One > is simply to make xml-rpc a top level project (parallel to jakarta, > httpd, etc). Sam - no critisims as I think we are largey in agreement here - but in order to refine the understanding - what does 'monitor' mean ? (see below) > > For example, I would be alarmed to see XML-RPC, Axis, and XML-Security > > all get a mandate to become one project or leave Apache. > > How many committers to xml-rpc are also committers to Axis or > xml-security? If the answer is zero, then this is not a solution either. So to be effective in terms of monitoring one needs to be an active committer ? > Don't be overly alarmed, nothing is going to change without approval of > the committers of this project, but the overall message is that we need > to move towards an organization structure where the active committers of > this project are represented in the PMC which is charged with overseeing > this codebase. I.e. in this picture the PMC is composed of at least one active committer per project ? Is that what you are saying - or did I hop a bridge too far ? Dw
