RE: [VOTE] ASL vs. GPL page: is this okay?
Hi Alex, You are absolutely right. I thought I had this one nailed but apparently not. Thank you for pointing out my mistake. Regards, Ceki Asunto: Re: [VOTE] ASL vs. GPL page: is this okay? The Working Without Copyleft article is remarkably good. The point about the FSF controlling the LGPL is another very significant point: On the contrary, I found this to be the weakest point of the article. = The LGPL states that you can choose between the present license or any = later -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [VOTE] ASL vs. GPL page: is this okay?
Ceki are you sure? I think we definitely need a solid document countering the idyllic but false world depicted by the FSF. I agree with comments you have made already, about the importance of licence and legal to ASF, Jakarta, and individuals involved, but I'm still not convinced that this(jakarta website) is the place to examine wider licence compatibilities. By all means have this discussion, but I think the page should be on www.apache.org and approved by people from all projects. Why? because it expresses an opinion, and expresses it as the opinion of Apache as a whole, and not only of the authors of the paper, therfore it has to actually represent the concensus of opinion. No? Hi Danny, What I am sure about is that licensing clarification efforts should be inerted into the licence FAQ (www.apache.org/foundation/licence-FAQ.html). Thanks for the heads up Jon. Your point about seeking consensus first is interesting. As I understand it, the common mechanism within Apache for doing things is to get something out first, then seek feedback/agreement/consensus/ build some more, seek feedback on the changes, do some more, ... My own personal experience indicates that if you first seek consesus before acting, you are likely to never get anywhere. Regards, Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Possiblly an attack, certainly a nuissance
Hi, Could we please disable posts from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to jakarta/apache lists. This person (or an impostor) has posted emails with the title new photos from my party! to many jakarta lists. The content of this mail is possibly a virus. TIA, Ceki __ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/mail.xml
Done. I hope the actual patch contains less typos than my previous mail describing the patch. :-) --- Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 1/9/02 4:27 AM, Ceki Gulcu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, Here is a patch jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/mail.xml, the source for the http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html page. The patch contains a few corrections, a sligt re-organisation and some stylistic changes. I think it provides for easier reading. I have not yet applied the patch awating approval. Regards, Ceki +1. I'm always up for experimentation on this page. -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] = - Ceki - http://qos.ch __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content
Sam, You are right stop creating new projects does not solve the Validator problem. However, stopping the creation of new projects might have long term effects. The effect might be increased collaboration or alternatively everyone leaving. It is a dangerous/stupid/daring (pick your choice) rule indeed. Regards, Ceki --- Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ceki Gülcü wrote: Jon, I share precisely the same concerns. Thank you for standing up on this issue. What do you suggest we do? I mean concretely. My first suggestion would be to stop creating new projects, starting *today*. If someone wants to contribute code, they do that within the framework of an *existing* project. If that is not possible, then they do it somewhere else. Regards, Ceki Come again? Recap: David Winterfeldt innocently began moving code from an existing subproject that he is a committer to (struts) to the commons (another existing subproject), unaware that Intake existed inside Turbine (a subproject that he is not a committer to). Validator has been a part of Struts for over a year, and has been independent of Struts for six months. David became an Apache committer in September. How does your proposed solution, i.e., stop creating new projects solve this problem? - Sam Ruby -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content
Peter, So are you proposing to become a log4j committer? Regards, Ceki --- Peter Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 09:15, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: Of course it is easier to start from scratch to invent yet another validation framework. This is where I see another failure of Jakarta. People only go with the easiest route without any concern about the long term mess they are making. Thats because thats what the PMC encourages (you included). If you recall at one stage LogKit was proposed as a jakarta project - before Log4j was present but the PMC decided to bring Log4j to jakarta instead. When commons was started it was because Avalon did not have the right advertising. Both of these things were a vote by the PMC to reinvent rather than reuse. The best way to describe it was something I think Craig said, something like - it doesn't much matter if there is an existing project with same aims, what matters is what committers are willing to commit to. It is much more sexier to rewrite something from scratch than it is to work with other peoples code. Why is struts a project? Wouldn't it have been more productive to the Apache community overall to live side-by-side with turbine (same mailing lists and project etc). Essentially struts would have been a complete revolution - having them together would have ensured a much higher level of cross pollination. Why is Log4j at jakarta? Wouldn't be better if it and LogKit were merged? What about the regex engines? I feel like Jakarta is just going down this path of having a bazillion different implementations and versions of the same thing and it is only getting worse. It is going to get far far far worse - everyone encourages it from the PMC down. Reinvent rather than reuse or so the chant goes. Commons was supposed to help clean that up by providing a central location, however all I see is it making it worse because people are just re-inventing what already exists in other projects instead of using existing projects as the basis. Correct. Commons is also fun because people not involved with the code have voting rights over it. However I do recall you +1'ed it even when I said it would end up like this ;) I'm starting to realize that Jakarta has grown to becoming a place where people only scratch their own itches and I agree that that is the basis for open source. However, we have no overall direction. We all have our own opinions and spend days and days discussing them and when it comes down to putting code into CVS, people do whatever they want anyway because there is no set of checks and balances to put some sort of higher level control over things. Thats because people don't want it. More than half the people at jakarta are egomaniacs. Not that this is a bad thing - it can be very productive but very few people want to work together because they can get more glory doing it themselves. People keep saying that Jakarta isn't broken. Well, if it isn't broken, then how come we have so many people doing their own thing and not working together? Jakarta is supposed to be a group collective, however it is becoming nothing more than another Sourceforge. If thats what you consider broken then it is broken and it is going to get much more broken. The only way to change this is to to vote it. Next time someone raises a vote to duplicate an existing project don't +1 it. And don't just complain when someone duplicates a part of turbine. I would to love to see more working together but I can't see it happening. People are not willing to work together - even for basic things. When I asked you to change turbines build system to not conflict with patterns in other projects your response was something along the lines. We used ant first, this is how you should do it, you are wrong - and thats basically when I stopped trying to get people to have standard build file format. You say you want to fix jakarta then prove it - lets start working together to get even the basic infrastructure common where they interface with other projects. So the ball is in your court now ;) BTW turbine is/has uploaded components to commons that are duplicates of Avalon functionality. ie the exact same thing that happened with validators except that turbine is the purp rather than the victim - so should I wail at you now ? ;) -- Cheers, Pete -- Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it -- Richard Feynman -- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] = - Ceki - http://qos.ch
Re: Just the JARs
At 18:56 01.01.2002 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Ted Husted wrote: Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:54:30 -0500 From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just the JARs Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Putting aside *all* the stuff we are talking about for a moement, and looking at the simple notion of just having release jars available w/o docs, source, etc I don't think this is a bad idea :) However Any license issues? Wouldn't we want to package the jar w/ a license ? This simple notion -- and my putting together a Jakarta release HOWTO -- is why I opened this particular thread. The license issue is well taken. I think it would be a good practice for us to include a license in all of our JARs. Even when we don't distribute them seperately ourselves, they are intended to be distributed seperately by our licensees. Point noted. How about including a copy of the LICENSE file in the META-INF subdirectory of each JAR file produced by an Apache project? Good suggestion. Log4j-1.2.jar will contain a LICENSE.txt file in the META-INF subdirectory. Regards, Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code conventions
At 19:23 02.01.2002 +1100, you wrote: On Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:58, Ceki Gulcu wrote: At 07:39 02.01.2002 +1100, Peter Donald wrote: Hi, This is not something that should have been brought up on the PMC list - it should be discussed on general. Peter I do not need your permission to bring up a subject on the PMC list. Its not the purpose of the PMC list. If someone asks how to configure tomcat on the general mailing list they would get a similar redirect. It was uncourteous of you to forward my message to the general list without permission. It was uncourteous of you to misuse the PMC mailing list - you should no better than to do that. Let us not confuse courtesy and your intolerance, shall we? If you had read my proposal carefully you would have seen that my proposal was to reach agreement on the PMC list first and than consult with the wider jakarta community. You got it all backwards. Consult with the committers. The PMC is irrelevent for this type of discussion - the developers are the ones to decide and PMC only steps in when there is legal or similar issues arise. Again, my proposal required al least two thirds majority of jakarta committers in order for the conventions to be adopted. Your right - it should be obvious that the preferences of that one third are not important. While you are at it, call me dictator, call me tyrant. Your remark reminds me of the following paragraph from the Green Book. Political struggle that results in the victory of a candidate with 51 per cent of the votes leads to a dictatorial governing body disguised as a false democracy, since 49 per cent of the electorate is ruled by an instrument of governing they did not vote for, but had imposed upon them. This is dictatorship. -- The Green Book, Muammar Al Qathafi For full text and the final solution to the problems of any community, refer to http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8744/readgb.htm The Green Book can be summarized as, War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. -- 1984, George Orwell I am so happy I don't live in Libya. Regards, Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code conventions
At 07:39 02.01.2002 +1100, Peter Donald wrote: Hi, This is not something that should have been brought up on the PMC list - it should be discussed on general. Peter I do not need your permission to bring up a subject on the PMC list. It was uncourteous of you to forward my message to the general list without permission. If you had read my proposal carefully you would have seen that my proposal was to reach agreement on the PMC list first and than consult with the wider jakarta community. On Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:28, Ceki Gülcü wrote: Conventions are a matter of taste and habit. Some are and some are designed to force programmers to implement things in particular ways and indirectly force good programming habits. Each subproject can indeed adopt and publish a convention of its own. However, most projects with the exception of Turbine and Velocity did not publish conventions. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) Avalon has one ... based on an earlier version of Turbines. I am not suggesting that we jettison the code and fire the committers, that would be pointy-haired. no but you are suggesting that the people who actually do the work no longer get to have a say in how they write code. Thats not pointy-haired at all! As soon as I see my first jakarta paycheck I will happily change over. You are saying the individual first collectivity second. How about collectivity first and the individual second? If it was a legitimate concern then maybe we could do something about it. About the only thing I can think of that we would want to change is when people use conventions like a_class_name anObject = ...; anObject.do_something(); And that is mainly due to the fact that it effects people outside the project aswell. However I don't think any of the jakarta projects use those conventions and I am not going to be the one to force anyone to change if they do. Again, my proposal required al least two thirds majority of jakarta committers in order for the conventions to be adopted. You nor I alone, do we represent a two thirds majority. However, a two thirds majority represents the will of the community. If that is contested as seems to be the case here, then the only remaining possibility is that there is no community but a loose gathering of unruly individuals. Regards, Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ASPizer
Endre, Although Jon might not be the most politically-correct person around, he is usually right. Jon is correct to observe that Jakarta is not a dumping ground for .bomb projects. I am very grateful to Jon for having the courage to speak up his mind. One might be crititical of Jon but he remains a cornerstone of Jakarta. Keep that mind before calling him ungracious parts of the body. On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Jon Stevens wrote: | on 10/15/01 11:15 AM, Paul Ilechko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | Peter and Jon, thanks for the feedback, sorry I didn't get a chance to respond | sooner. | | A few comments: | | ASPizer is currently a production quality product, and in fact is being used | on a live website in the UK. It was developed as a pr oduct by THBS, with the | intention that we would sell it. However, due to various economic factors such | as the decline in the ASP market and the recent difficulties in obtaining | venture capital, we have decided that at this time it is not feasible for is | to continue in that direction. | | We aren't a dumping ground for .bomb projects. Why are you such an _asshole_ on mailing lists, Jon?? I just cannot believe your emails. They are such shit shometimes, it is just amazing! Go Jon, Go Jon, Go Jon, Go JOOON!!! YEAH! Endre. -- Mvh, Endre - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ASPizer
Endre, Of course it's not a dumping ground. This is about whether the Open Source Community at Apache would be interested in a project. Starting the debate from Apache's side with such crude, ugly, disrespectful remarks like Jon's coming up with is just not fair. This company is dumping a whole lot of money too, I guess, coming from the investment in the software. There might be something there, just _might_ be something of interest. Why not try to look at that before launching such shit at the person that is, basically, just trying to be nice! | I am very grateful to Jon for having the courage to speak up his | mind. One might be crititical of Jon but he remains a cornerstone of | Jakarta. Cornerstone and cornerstone. Would Jakarta crumble and die away if Jon wasn't here? Contrary to the well known adage, some people are truly irreplaceable. For example, if it wasn't for Winston S. Churchill we would probably all be doing the Nazi salute today. Speaking one's mind, especially if expressing unpopular views, takes a lot of courage. It would make Jon a lot more popular if he were always smooth and accomodating. Jakarta needs people who can cut through the bullshit. Jon is one of them. Coming back to the issue at hand, if ASPizer authors are truly committed to open source and the Apache model, they should counter Jon's remarks and justify the reasons why their product should be part of Jakarta. Jakarta is not a dumping ground for .bomb projects. Untactful? Yes. Accurate statement? Yes. In their propposal, THBS commits to two years of development while a paragraph earlier they say that they can no longer fund the project. What kind of bull is that? I did not read anyone but Jon take the time challenge the inconsistencies in the proposal. We can all sit back and criticize Jon's style. In the mean time, somebody has to get the job done and it's often Jon. | Keep that mind before calling him ungracious parts of the body. I just wanna throw some shit back at him, because I don't respect him that much as a person, looking at his shitty remarks to other people. He probably doesn't notice anyways, or what do you think?? As a coder, I've mentioned before, he's apparently very good. And his observations and whatnot are also _insightful_, but nothing more. Why not just package things just a little bit nicer? Or just whatever? Be a bit more polite? Be, you know, nice to people? Especially to people he even doesn't know.. I rather relate to a person who is direct than someone who always appears to be nice. And I'd like to point out that Jon is just Jon. The world wouldn't stop revolving if he just .. disappeared or anything. Even Apache wouldn't stop working. Actually, nothing would stop working without him. Jakarta is just Jakarta. The world wouldn't stop revolving if Jakarta just .. disappeared or anything. Even Apache wouldn't stop working. That's the part this crude dude apparently haven't realized, talking like that to whoever gets in the way of his thoughts.. No one is proposing that you marry Jon. Jon is not doing Apache any good being like he is. I sincerly hope there isn't any suits watching this list at all, because that could ruin much.. If you are trying to start a lynch party, you are unlikely to find many suitors in this forum. Regards, Ceki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
