Re: Web Components/Common project
On Mon, August 8, 2005 12:42 pm, robert burrell donkin said: On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 01:54 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote: Hello all, What's the status on the new project proposal? Has the discussion moved to another list or has it just staled? in a holding pattern: IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a consensus. opinions? Progress on this project seemed to kind of stop, based on posts about it, about two weeks ago. As Robert indicates, there was never any consensus on the name. There were a bunch of options and comments listed on the Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/CreatingCommonsForWebComponents ...but the discussion seemed to kind of fade away. My personal favorite off that list was Jakarta Web Parts For Java (JWP4J). It has the virtue of sounding like some other Apache/OSS projects (Log4J, SOAP4J, ws-wsrp4j, etc). It has the problem however of being almost identical to my own Java Web Parts project. I still have an interest in donating my work to the foundation, and that would start with the name if so desired, but I still have concerns about such a donation that might make choosing a different name more prudent. Anyway, the Jakarta Taglib Project has voted how it would like to take part on this new project, and the result was: 1.The Jakarta Taglibs Project would like to be merged into the project 2.The Jakarta Standard Taglib should then be a project of its own 3.The remaining taglibs would be gradually migrated to the new project, the most actives first 4.It's not decided yet if the migrated taglibs would have a newer release prior to the migration I'm not sure there was ever a consensus on what the overall structure of the project would be either (someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that point)... It seems like there might be a risk of sub-projects within sub-projects within sub-projects, which I'm not sure would be the best organizational stucture... if you had Jakarta Taglibs as a sub-component of the JWP4J project (assume for the sake of argument that name sticks), and then have Jakarta Standard Taglib as a sub-project of Jakarta Taglibs, is that the best structure to have? How deep of a hierarchy is OK and how deep is too deep? My own JWP project has a taglib package that has individual taglibs within it (AjaxTags, BasicString, etc), so I have the same thing going on... I personally wouldn't go beyond 3-levels like this, and I just wanted to raise the issue now before anything actually moves forward in case others have thoughts on this. Frank - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Web Components/Common project
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 13:14 -0400, Frank W. Zammetti wrote: On Mon, August 8, 2005 12:42 pm, robert burrell donkin said: On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 01:54 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote: snip Anyway, the Jakarta Taglib Project has voted how it would like to take part on this new project, and the result was: 1.The Jakarta Taglibs Project would like to be merged into the project 2.The Jakarta Standard Taglib should then be a project of its own 3.The remaining taglibs would be gradually migrated to the new project, the most actives first 4.It's not decided yet if the migrated taglibs would have a newer release prior to the migration I'm not sure there was ever a consensus on what the overall structure of the project would be either (someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that point)... It seems like there might be a risk of sub-projects within sub-projects within sub-projects, which I'm not sure would be the best organizational stucture... if you had Jakarta Taglibs as a sub-component of the JWP4J project (assume for the sake of argument that name sticks), and then have Jakarta Standard Taglib as a sub-project of Jakarta Taglibs, is that the best structure to have? How deep of a hierarchy is OK and how deep is too deep? any deep is too deep :) AIUI everything will be flat: collective management and only social divisions. standard taglibs will become a jakarta sub-project. BTW is there any real reason not to start the promotion process for standard taglibs ASAP? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Web Components/Common project
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, robert burrell donkin wrote: AIUI everything will be flat: collective management and only social divisions. standard taglibs will become a jakarta sub-project. +1, I agree. BTW is there any real reason not to start the promotion process for standard taglibs ASAP? None that I can see. There's a big shopping list of Jakarta rearrangements that have been desired over the last couple of years that I want to email about soon, as soon as I get back into the swing of things (currently ill and convalescing at home). Nothing too scary; HttpClient, Tomcat, Slide, JCS all need moving; Taglibs now too. Probably others. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Web Components/Common project
Frank W. Zammetti wrote: point)... It seems like there might be a risk of sub-projects within sub-projects within sub-projects, which I'm not sure would be the best organizational stucture... if you had Jakarta Taglibs as a sub-component of the JWP4J project (assume for the sake of argument that name sticks), and then have Jakarta Standard Taglib as a sub-project of Jakarta Taglibs, is that the best structure to have? How deep of a hierarchy is OK and how deep is too deep? Right now, the Standard is already a sub-project of the Jakarta Taglibs. So, what we meant (sorry for the confusion) is that the Standard wouldn't be migrated to this new project; instead, it would be a Jakarta sub-project, sibling of the new project. Regarding the other taglibs, I agree, it might make more sense for all of them to be direct sub-projects of the new project, instead of having an intermediate taglibs sub-project. But that's something we can decide later one - as we (the Jakarta Taglibs project) decided that we should create new taglibs from scratch (using the legacy code), the structure wouldn't matter at this point. My own JWP project has a taglib package that has individual taglibs within it (AjaxTags, BasicString, etc), so I have the same thing going on... I personally wouldn't go beyond 3-levels like this, and I just wanted to raise the issue now before anything actually moves forward in case others have thoughts on this. I agree - sometimes it makes more sense to aggregate components by functionality than classes. For instance, we could have a Security sub-project which would produce taglibs (like a PageGuardTag), filters and even Struts actions. -- Felipe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Web Components/Common project
On 8/8/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip/ IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a consensus. opinions? snap/ An informal thread was here [ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-generalm=111972374202676w=2 ], where I believe the majority opted for Web Components. While it would be nice, I doubt this is going to be unanimous. Unless there are other suggestions, or someone else beats me to it, I will call a vote in 24 hours. I plan to keep it simple, mark X before the name that appeals most to you. On 8/8/05, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, robert burrell donkin wrote: AIUI everything will be flat: collective management and only social divisions. standard taglibs will become a jakarta sub-project. +1, I agree. snip/ +1 On 8/8/05, Felipe Leme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip/ Regarding the other taglibs, I agree, it might make more sense for all of them to be direct sub-projects of the new project, instead of having an intermediate taglibs sub-project. But that's something we can decide later one - as we (the Jakarta Taglibs project) decided that we should create new taglibs from scratch (using the legacy code), the structure wouldn't matter at this point. snap/ I will call a vote on taglibs-dev today. While it seems we are agreeing on the flat hierarchy, this is, IMO, important enough to close for the Taglibs project before moving forward. -Rahul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
