Re: POI TLP -- constructively
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Martin van den Bemt wrote: If poi committers agree with this proposal, I like to hear them :) We had a discussion on something like this on the poi-dev list back in the summer. To save everyone having to trawl back, here's basically what I had to say. I it is felt that POI should migrate to a TLP, I'd be happy with that. I've had a chat with Henri, and I have an idea of what that'd entail. I'm happy to do some of the work on gaining TLP status, such as helping with the various documents and charters. If POI doesn't go for TLP, then I think it does need to integrate better with Jakarta. I think it would be good if more of our committers also submitted the odd patch to other Jakarta sub-projects, and if the odd jakarta committer contributed some code or advice to us. I think the easiest way to facilitate this is: 1) get all poi committers subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2) get more poi committers to attend apachecons, party@ events etc, and meet more jakarta committers. (I found it very helpful to meet other jakarta people in person) What I'm not a fan of are the one user and one dev list for jakarta type proposals. If the option was that, or TLP, I'd start writing the TLP supporting docs right now. Oh, but that's not an invition to suggest it, just to get us out ;-) On a related note, I feel I ought to stand up a bit for the POI support for the recent release. I was given some advice, made use of the same build tasks as last time etc. The problem wasn't so much that I wasn't fully supported, it was more that the advice and build process was out of date. In future, we'll do POI releases according to the latest advice, as two votes (one for the idea of a release, and one to approve the files for the release). So, we'll be able to get advice from the rest of Jakarta if we ever fall behind on release best pratices :) Nick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
+1 to this thread (the Jakarta parts - not the let's all talk about our kids, but if anyone wants to I'm as talkative as any other father :) ). +1 to making progress -1 to re-running the old bile. My kids both got hamsters yesterday (early for christmas), boy was that ever exciting! :-) d. *** The information in this e-mail is confidential and for use by the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the message from your computer. You may not copy or forward it or use or disclose its contents to any other person. As Internet communications are capable of data corruption Student Loans Company Limited does not accept any responsibility for changes made to this message after it was sent. For this reason it may be inappropriate to rely on advice or opinions contained in an e-mail without obtaining written confirmation of it. Neither Student Loans Company Limited or the sender accepts any liability or responsibility for viruses as it is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any). Opinions and views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and may not reflect the opinions and views of The Student Loans Company Limited. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Andy-- good thoughts. A very pragmatic look at the situation. Defuses the debate and provides practical suggestions for moving forward. By the way, as a POI user, I wouldn't worry too much about POI being doomed due to Microsoft's switch in formats. It's going to take years for developers to be able to assume everyone has Office 2007? 2008? on their desks. WILL On 12/18/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really liked hearing Avik speak up because he's been hurting for awhile and not spoken up. It was Nick's first release, cut him some slack. POI has been around since 2001, in Apache since 2002. It is nearly 2007. Talks of mentoring us or incubating us are a little patronizing and insulting (multiple of us our even members of the foundation though I forget who). Much of the thread is about bashing us and bashing me in particular which I stupidly reacted to partly out of fatigue. I appologize for that, I've been very busy launching http://buni.org and planning our corporate structure. It is fair to say that not many POI people participate in Jakarta. However, to add perspective we never joined the Jakarta as it is -- we joined Jakarta as it was...and one day this formed around us. It is fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. Nick has been doing a great job and a lot of work. (I on the other hand will have to merge my patches into SVN before I can even commit them since they're off of CVS :-P ). However it was his first release. Moreover, Apache's release policies have evolved considerably since the last official release and none of us have a valid signed key...that needs to be rectified (laziness, don't like conventions where all the cool key signing parties). We're not the only one's guilty of kinds of neglect. Our own Marc Johnson (who cofounded the project) has been extremely frustrated at the lack of responsiveness in getting his access/etc in order and no one at POI seems to be able to jerk the right chain in Apache to make that happen (and I think he requested from this PMC with no effect). So much that he's given up! In any case, legal issues aside (which have to a good degree abated, but take yourself back 5 years) I really don't want POI to really merge into Jakarta (which is really now the successor to Jakarta Commons) and I don't think the majority of the committers do either. On the other hand, I really don't think POI by itself can be a TLP as its scope is too narrow (historically this was deliberate). I also don't think that parts of POI have much of a future as we're moving to an XML formats era, but other parts certainly do. Partly because of projects like POI, Microsoft is even moving. Once the default is to save in an XML format then will anyone really care about POI as it is as more than a migration tool. That being said, there is considerable interest in unified APIs for each of these verticals (spreadsheets, documents, etc) and considerable life in POI with a very active userbase. Many people dealing with data formats have asked for common APIs for the various verticals that output to the various formats. Moreover, many of us are no longer as single minded with regards to Java as we once were (POI ruby for example). And achieving API compatibility across these could be interesting. I therefore propose this: * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise) * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal and working out a consensus. (BTW that pretty much is batting 1000 on this: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark) Full disclosure: I've also submitted a counter proposal to the committers as an alternative to leave apache entirely. However thus far most folks seem to value POIs association with Apache and the opportunities afforded them, even if they find it difficult to work with as one person stated in response. I suspect TLP status would alleviate some of the mutual snags between apache and POI (for one we could get poor Marc his access back despite him having sent in his CLA now like 3 times including when the project moved to Apache and for two we'd be sending our reports in ourselves and thus have to do more proper oversight). However, PLLEEAASS let's press the PAUSE button until January 3rd so that we can all get very drunk and open presents rather than jerk each other's chains in front of a computer on a mailing list. -Andy Andrew C. Oliver Buni Luni http://buni.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Forio Business
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Thank you Andy for the detailed and constructive response. I didn't and won't participate in the previous thread because there were too many negatives there. I like the proposals below, so long as the X months is not too large. I believe a 3-4 months target is appropriate for a POI TLP. That said, Jakarta (and its Chair in particular) is still responsible for POI in the intermediate time. Legally, we have to monitor your releases (as I understand it). I just want that to be 'light touch' until a TLP is possible. And can we please go to sleep for Christmas now! Stephen Andrew C. Oliver wrote: I really liked hearing Avik speak up because he's been hurting for awhile and not spoken up. It was Nick's first release, cut him some slack. POI has been around since 2001, in Apache since 2002. It is nearly 2007. Talks of mentoring us or incubating us are a little patronizing and insulting (multiple of us our even members of the foundation though I forget who). Much of the thread is about bashing us and bashing me in particular which I stupidly reacted to partly out of fatigue. I appologize for that, I've been very busy launching http://buni.org and planning our corporate structure. It is fair to say that not many POI people participate in Jakarta. However, to add perspective we never joined the Jakarta as it is -- we joined Jakarta as it was...and one day this formed around us. It is fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. Nick has been doing a great job and a lot of work. (I on the other hand will have to merge my patches into SVN before I can even commit them since they're off of CVS :-P ). However it was his first release. Moreover, Apache's release policies have evolved considerably since the last official release and none of us have a valid signed key...that needs to be rectified (laziness, don't like conventions where all the cool key signing parties). We're not the only one's guilty of kinds of neglect. Our own Marc Johnson (who cofounded the project) has been extremely frustrated at the lack of responsiveness in getting his access/etc in order and no one at POI seems to be able to jerk the right chain in Apache to make that happen (and I think he requested from this PMC with no effect). So much that he's given up! In any case, legal issues aside (which have to a good degree abated, but take yourself back 5 years) I really don't want POI to really merge into Jakarta (which is really now the successor to Jakarta Commons) and I don't think the majority of the committers do either. On the other hand, I really don't think POI by itself can be a TLP as its scope is too narrow (historically this was deliberate). I also don't think that parts of POI have much of a future as we're moving to an XML formats era, but other parts certainly do. Partly because of projects like POI, Microsoft is even moving. Once the default is to save in an XML format then will anyone really care about POI as it is as more than a migration tool. That being said, there is considerable interest in unified APIs for each of these verticals (spreadsheets, documents, etc) and considerable life in POI with a very active userbase. Many people dealing with data formats have asked for common APIs for the various verticals that output to the various formats. Moreover, many of us are no longer as single minded with regards to Java as we once were (POI ruby for example). And achieving API compatibility across these could be interesting. I therefore propose this: * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise) * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal and working out a consensus. (BTW that pretty much is batting 1000 on this: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark) Full disclosure: I've also submitted a counter proposal to the committers as an alternative to leave apache entirely. However thus far most folks seem to value POIs association with Apache and the opportunities afforded them, even if they find it difficult to work with as one person stated in response. I suspect TLP status would alleviate some of the mutual snags between apache and POI (for one we could get poor Marc his access back despite him having sent in his CLA now like 3 times including when the project moved to Apache and for two we'd be sending our reports in ourselves and thus have to do more proper oversight). However, PLLEEAASS let's press the PAUSE button until January 3rd so that we can all get very drunk and open presents rather than jerk each other's chains in front of a computer on a mailing
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Sounds good to me - thanks for this. Niall On 12/18/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really liked hearing Avik speak up because he's been hurting for awhile and not spoken up. It was Nick's first release, cut him some slack. POI has been around since 2001, in Apache since 2002. It is nearly 2007. Talks of mentoring us or incubating us are a little patronizing and insulting (multiple of us our even members of the foundation though I forget who). Much of the thread is about bashing us and bashing me in particular which I stupidly reacted to partly out of fatigue. I appologize for that, I've been very busy launching http://buni.org and planning our corporate structure. It is fair to say that not many POI people participate in Jakarta. However, to add perspective we never joined the Jakarta as it is -- we joined Jakarta as it was...and one day this formed around us. It is fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. Nick has been doing a great job and a lot of work. (I on the other hand will have to merge my patches into SVN before I can even commit them since they're off of CVS :-P ). However it was his first release. Moreover, Apache's release policies have evolved considerably since the last official release and none of us have a valid signed key...that needs to be rectified (laziness, don't like conventions where all the cool key signing parties). We're not the only one's guilty of kinds of neglect. Our own Marc Johnson (who cofounded the project) has been extremely frustrated at the lack of responsiveness in getting his access/etc in order and no one at POI seems to be able to jerk the right chain in Apache to make that happen (and I think he requested from this PMC with no effect). So much that he's given up! In any case, legal issues aside (which have to a good degree abated, but take yourself back 5 years) I really don't want POI to really merge into Jakarta (which is really now the successor to Jakarta Commons) and I don't think the majority of the committers do either. On the other hand, I really don't think POI by itself can be a TLP as its scope is too narrow (historically this was deliberate). I also don't think that parts of POI have much of a future as we're moving to an XML formats era, but other parts certainly do. Partly because of projects like POI, Microsoft is even moving. Once the default is to save in an XML format then will anyone really care about POI as it is as more than a migration tool. That being said, there is considerable interest in unified APIs for each of these verticals (spreadsheets, documents, etc) and considerable life in POI with a very active userbase. Many people dealing with data formats have asked for common APIs for the various verticals that output to the various formats. Moreover, many of us are no longer as single minded with regards to Java as we once were (POI ruby for example). And achieving API compatibility across these could be interesting. I therefore propose this: * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise) * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal and working out a consensus. (BTW that pretty much is batting 1000 on this: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark) Full disclosure: I've also submitted a counter proposal to the committers as an alternative to leave apache entirely. However thus far most folks seem to value POIs association with Apache and the opportunities afforded them, even if they find it difficult to work with as one person stated in response. I suspect TLP status would alleviate some of the mutual snags between apache and POI (for one we could get poor Marc his access back despite him having sent in his CLA now like 3 times including when the project moved to Apache and for two we'd be sending our reports in ourselves and thus have to do more proper oversight). However, PLLEEAASS let's press the PAUSE button until January 3rd so that we can all get very drunk and open presents rather than jerk each other's chains in front of a computer on a mailing list. -Andy Andrew C. Oliver Buni Luni http://buni.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Nice, agreed. -Rahul On 12/18/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really liked hearing Avik speak up because he's been hurting for snip/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
+1. take a break :) -- dims On 12/18/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really liked hearing Avik speak up because he's been hurting for awhile and not spoken up. It was Nick's first release, cut him some slack. POI has been around since 2001, in Apache since 2002. It is nearly 2007. Talks of mentoring us or incubating us are a little patronizing and insulting (multiple of us our even members of the foundation though I forget who). Much of the thread is about bashing us and bashing me in particular which I stupidly reacted to partly out of fatigue. I appologize for that, I've been very busy launching http://buni.org and planning our corporate structure. It is fair to say that not many POI people participate in Jakarta. However, to add perspective we never joined the Jakarta as it is -- we joined Jakarta as it was...and one day this formed around us. It is fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. Nick has been doing a great job and a lot of work. (I on the other hand will have to merge my patches into SVN before I can even commit them since they're off of CVS :-P ). However it was his first release. Moreover, Apache's release policies have evolved considerably since the last official release and none of us have a valid signed key...that needs to be rectified (laziness, don't like conventions where all the cool key signing parties). We're not the only one's guilty of kinds of neglect. Our own Marc Johnson (who cofounded the project) has been extremely frustrated at the lack of responsiveness in getting his access/etc in order and no one at POI seems to be able to jerk the right chain in Apache to make that happen (and I think he requested from this PMC with no effect). So much that he's given up! In any case, legal issues aside (which have to a good degree abated, but take yourself back 5 years) I really don't want POI to really merge into Jakarta (which is really now the successor to Jakarta Commons) and I don't think the majority of the committers do either. On the other hand, I really don't think POI by itself can be a TLP as its scope is too narrow (historically this was deliberate). I also don't think that parts of POI have much of a future as we're moving to an XML formats era, but other parts certainly do. Partly because of projects like POI, Microsoft is even moving. Once the default is to save in an XML format then will anyone really care about POI as it is as more than a migration tool. That being said, there is considerable interest in unified APIs for each of these verticals (spreadsheets, documents, etc) and considerable life in POI with a very active userbase. Many people dealing with data formats have asked for common APIs for the various verticals that output to the various formats. Moreover, many of us are no longer as single minded with regards to Java as we once were (POI ruby for example). And achieving API compatibility across these could be interesting. I therefore propose this: * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise) * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal and working out a consensus. (BTW that pretty much is batting 1000 on this: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark) Full disclosure: I've also submitted a counter proposal to the committers as an alternative to leave apache entirely. However thus far most folks seem to value POIs association with Apache and the opportunities afforded them, even if they find it difficult to work with as one person stated in response. I suspect TLP status would alleviate some of the mutual snags between apache and POI (for one we could get poor Marc his access back despite him having sent in his CLA now like 3 times including when the project moved to Apache and for two we'd be sending our reports in ourselves and thus have to do more proper oversight). However, PLLEEAASS let's press the PAUSE button until January 3rd so that we can all get very drunk and open presents rather than jerk each other's chains in front of a computer on a mailing list. -Andy Andrew C. Oliver Buni Luni http://buni.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://www.wso2.net (Oxygen for Web Service Developers) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Hi Andrew, thanks a lot for that mail. It is fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. See my reply to Avik's mail. I didn't mean to focus. (That pun was unintentional, but I'll leave it in.) I really don't want POI to really merge into Jakarta (which is really now the successor to Jakarta Commons) and I don't think the majority of the committers do either. That answers the question I was asking myself since shortly after the vote thread started. Is POI going to go independent, or is it going to merge into Jakarta? If it's going independent within a few months, there is no point in opening SVN access. On the other hand, I really don't think POI by itself can be a TLP as its scope is too narrow (historically this was deliberate). I also don't think that parts of POI have much of a future as we're moving to an XML formats I was told that vinyl is dead in the early 90s. Starting next year, nothing will be released on vinyl anymore. I built a collection of well over 1000 records since, and there are still new releases. It's not mainstream anymore, but it exists and has it's followers. era, but other parts certainly do. Partly because of projects like POI, Microsoft is even moving. Once the default is to save in an XML format then will anyone really care about POI as it is as more than a migration tool. There's nothing wrong with being a migration tool. Being more than a migration tool is even better. +1 to the rest of your mail. cheers, Roland That being said, there is considerable interest in unified APIs for each of these verticals (spreadsheets, documents, etc) and considerable life in POI with a very active userbase. Many people dealing with data formats have asked for common APIs for the various verticals that output to the various formats. Moreover, many of us are no longer as single minded with regards to Java as we once were (POI ruby for example). And achieving API compatibility across these could be interesting. I therefore propose this: * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise) * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal and working out a consensus. (BTW that pretty much is batting 1000 on this: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark) Full disclosure: I've also submitted a counter proposal to the committers as an alternative to leave apache entirely. However thus far most folks seem to value POIs association with Apache and the opportunities afforded them, even if they find it difficult to work with as one person stated in response. I suspect TLP status would alleviate some of the mutual snags between apache and POI (for one we could get poor Marc his access back despite him having sent in his CLA now like 3 times including when the project moved to Apache and for two we'd be sending our reports in ourselves and thus have to do more proper oversight). However, PLLEEAASS let's press the PAUSE button until January 3rd so that we can all get very drunk and open presents rather than jerk each other's chains in front of a computer on a mailing list. -Andy Andrew C. Oliver Buni Luni http://buni.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
See inline. Andrew C. Oliver wrote: It is fair to say that not many POI people participate in Jakarta. However, to add perspective we never joined the Jakarta as it is -- we joined Jakarta as it was...and one day this formed around us. It is fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. Nick has been doing a great job and a lot of work. (I on the other hand will have to merge my patches into SVN before I can even commit them since they're off of CVS :-P ). However it was his first release. Moreover, Apache's release policies have evolved considerably since the last official release and none of us have a valid signed key...that needs to be rectified (laziness, don't like conventions where all the cool key signing parties). We're not the only one's guilty of kinds of neglect. Our own Marc Johnson (who cofounded the project) has been extremely frustrated at the lack of responsiveness in getting his access/etc in order and no one at POI seems to be able to jerk the right chain in Apache to make that happen (and I think he requested from this PMC with no effect). So much that he's given up! First of all : Nick is not the one that got blamed and was given credit for the good work he is doing at POI. The real point here was oversight, which sparked the idea of mentoring. I didn't have a clue about Marc Johnson to be honest. And POI shouldn't jerk the right chain the VP of Jakarta should do that, only this VP didn't know about Marc Johnson :) (maybe just bad reading on my part though). I prefer to restart a vote to get him aboard, or you can do the honors yourself (meaning POI) when POI is TLP (although if you take that path that process will take even longer) In any case, legal issues aside (which have to a good degree abated, but Let's leave that aside for the moment. I therefore propose this: * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise) We need to set a date on this (see below about the board). BTW this was the only vote that was in my planning to be called, so no other votes will be called :) The steps after this vote was passed, wouldn't need any votes (as far as I can oversee now). * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months That is what every project does / should do. The problem was that this was not happening. As Stephen already said, the Jarkarta PMC (and me personally) are responsible for whatever you do at POI as long you are at Jakarta. So with vote results, the actual release, new committers and other issues, you need to inform the PMC, so they have the ability to check that everything is ok. (just want to add this specifically, although I don't think you meant to specifically exclude this) * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal and working out a consensus. Agreed. Maybe we should poll the board if they have any conditions, since they are the actual body that needs to approve the establishment of the POI Project. I'll ping them and see if they have time to talk about this on Wednesday. I'll let everyone know if there is anything to report from that front. Mvgr, Martin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Is this just your proposal or do other POI committers back this up ? (probably in the text, but not as clear as I like it to be). If poi committers agree with this proposal, I like to hear them :) Mvgr, Martin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Need to add here that for the TLP Proposal you also need a vote from Jakarta.. I'll try to shut up now :) Mvgr, Martin Martin van den Bemt wrote: See inline. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
Sleep Martinsleep. All will be answered, resolved...but not today. Right now I'm going to help my 2 year old draw dinosaurs with his Hanukkah present (he is obsessed with dinosaurs). -andy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: POI TLP -- constructively
On 12/18/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sleep Martinsleep. All will be answered, resolved...but not today. Right now I'm going to help my 2 year old draw dinosaurs with his Hanukkah present (he is obsessed with dinosaurs). My 2 year old is obsessed with trains. We let the family know this and his hoard of 16 trains is going to double this christmas. I'm looking forward to seeing his reaction as he sits and opens presents on Saturday (yeah, I'm declaring Christmas on the 23rd because I want 3 days of playing with toys and not 1 day followed by 4 days of work :) ). +1 to this thread (the Jakarta parts - not the let's all talk about our kids, but if anyone wants to I'm as talkative as any other father :) ). Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
