Re: Confused with PMCs, TLPs, ASF and Power?

2003-12-19 Thread Danny Angus




 Be aware of the
 disclaimer at the top

Nice disclaimer ;-)

d.



***
The information in this e-mail is confidential and for use by the addressee(s) only. 
If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible for delivery of the message to 
the intended recipient) please notify us immediately on 0141 306 2050 and 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: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Michael Davey

Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:

How about Jakarta = Java Development? Then, they all seem in place, no?

Henri Yandell wrote:

Because it's wrong.

XML has lots of Java bits, and Maven, Ant, Cocoon, Avalon, James are all
Java Development and not in Jakarta.

Jakarta is the *brand*.  It defines itself.  Jakarta brand development. 
A brand can give a unique identity and grouping to an otherwise 
disparate and commodity range of goods and services.  Think of any large 
brand:

McDonalds:  Fast food restaurants.  And accommodation.  And a childrens 
charity.

Nike: Sneakers (trainers).  And sports clothing.  And fashion clothing. 
And a sports team. And a college (American) football league.

Virgin.  Music label.  And music shops.  And hot air balloons.  And an 
airline.  And trains.  And mobile 'phones, drinks, health clubs, 
Internet service provider, credit cards, finance and car rentals.

Personally, I think the Jakarta brand has much much more to say about 
*how* the software is developed and *how* the community operates than 
*what* products are offered, *what* language it is written in and *what* 
languages can use the products.

So perhaps the Jakarta tagline should be ...it's in the process. 
...it's in the community.

--
Michael


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC

2003-12-19 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
On Dec 19, 2003, at 12:21 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

Henri Yandell wrote:

If all the PMC's share the same website, who is responsible
for the website as a global concept. For example, the need
to do mirrors.

If a Jakarta-Site PMC exists, all other PMCs [jakarta sub-project 
based]
are accepting the Jakarta Site PMC's oversight over their websites.
How do you think the Jakarta site works already?  The site2 module is 
just
the core Jakarta site.  All of the projects already have their own 
sites
in their own CVS, which are then checked out under the
/www/jakarta.apache.org/$project.  Nothing would have to change, 
unless a
project *wanted* a new domain, from what I can see.  Am I missing your
point?  I'm just not seeing the problem.
The Jakarta PMC, as the group responsible for oversight of Jakarta, is 
responsible also for all content on the website.

And I couldn't imagine projects leaving jakarta not wanting their own 
website.

geir

	--- Noel

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
Geir Magnusson Jr   203-247-1713(m)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Ted Husted
Michael Davey wrote:
Jakarta is the *brand*.  It defines itself.  Jakarta brand development. 
A brand can give a unique identity and grouping to an otherwise 
disparate and commodity range of goods and services.  
Apache is a brand too, and, IMHO, a much stronger brand than Jakarta.

I believe Jakarta distracts people from the fact that everything we do 
here is on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation. We are not Jakarta 
Committers, we are Apache Committers. We use the Apache License, 
package our product for apache.org, check code into cvs.apache.org, and 
donate every line to the Apache Software Foundation.

I realize that there are people who have romantic notions about 
Jakarta and like to talk about preserving Jakarta for Jakarta's sake. 
But for the life of me, I can't see why. For me, it's always been about 
the codebase and its community. If a product I use is hosted at 
SourceForge, I work at SourceForge. If it's hosted at Jakarta, I work at 
Jakarta. If it's a top-level ASF project, then I work there. I go where 
my community lives; and my community is centered on a codebase, not a 
hostname.

There are people who have called Jakarta a jewel. I'd agree that 
Cactus is a jewel, as is Lucene, and Velocity, and all the other 
*communities* we've built around our codebases. But Jakarta is not the 
jewel, at best it's a jewelry box.

All along, there have been people who envisioned a Jakarta community. 
But, what's the point of that, really? We already have the Apache 
community and the open source community. Why do we need another 
community within a community? What's the point of another layer of 
indirection?

In my experience, if you make a significant contribution to any open 
source codebase anywhere, its community will welcome you with open arms. 
We don't need hostnames to create communities. People create their own 
communities and forge their own relationships, by the simple virtue of 
their contributions.

And look what's happening with logging: Now that it's a TLP, they are 
bringing-in the various Log4J compatibles. Now, there can be one Apache 
logging project serving every platform. That's community-building!

The real, underlying issue with Jakarta is that most of our products are 
*not* about Java. They are about a feature set. Java was just a 
convenient implementation language, but most of our products could be 
implemented in other languages and made available to a broader community.

In fact, many have, but since they are not Java implementations, we have 
multiple communities around a product instead of one. A language-centric 
project like Jakarta doesn't create community, it dilutes it.

But I would not say that Jakarta is broken. I'd say Jakarta is finally 
starting to work. The proof that Jakarta is working is that products are 
finally growing up and becoming projects.

Every worthy parent's goal is self-sustaining children. The Foundation, 
like a good parent, has always tried to build self-sustaining projects 
-- projects that can outlive their creators. I'm happy that some of 
these projects were born at Jakarta and became great enough to join our 
top-level peers.

So, why are Ant, Maven, Logging, Slide, et al, graduating to top-level 
Apache projects: because they can :)

-Ted.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
On Dec 19, 2003, at 8:01 AM, Ted Husted wrote:

Michael Davey wrote:
Jakarta is the *brand*.  It defines itself.  Jakarta brand 
development. A brand can give a unique identity and grouping to an 
otherwise disparate and commodity range of goods and services.
Apache is a brand too, and, IMHO, a much stronger brand than Jakarta.
Not to Java people.  I agree w/ you that it should be, but Apache 
Jakarta serves just as well, just as Apache Httpd is a strong brand 
too :)

I believe Jakarta distracts people from the fact that everything we do 
here is on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation. We are not 
Jakarta Committers, we are Apache Committers. We use the Apache 
License, package our product for apache.org, check code into 
cvs.apache.org, and donate every line to the Apache Software 
Foundation.

I realize that there are people who have romantic notions about 
Jakarta and like to talk about preserving Jakarta for Jakarta's 
sake. But for the life of me, I can't see why. For me, it's always 
been about the codebase and its community.
Jakarta is also a community - while it may also be a romantic notion, 
it is a fact. Denying that fact serves well the high-minded notion of 
for the Foundation, but ignores the reality.

The ASF has seen the incredible growth of codebase, community and thus 
opportunity for participation in the projects like Jakarta, XML, 
WebServices, etc, all of which are larger umpbrella-like entities where 
like minded people can come together and work on whatever scratches 
their itch near and with others that also have the same interests.

Preserving those fostering communities is a romantic notion worth 
working for, and not at adds with the ASF or it's governance 
requirements.  It generates an opportunity for new ideas and 
collaborations to take hold, and a place go grow and live until the 
project wants to be a TLP.  Or doesn't.  :)

geir

P.S. And before you say Incubator Project,  the Incubator is by 
design not intended to be such an entity, but rather a mechanism to 
ensure health and accounting of IP and community of incoming codebases 
and projects, the protection of the ASF.

--
Geir Magnusson Jr   203-247-1713(m)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Just in case you're curious

2003-12-19 Thread Martin van den Bemt
Andrew,

The big difference between Geir and you, is that Geir is actually trying to give 
feedback and explain the situation on what's going on.
The only messages I keep reading from you are protests against private lists and that 
they should be public  and for the rest nothing at all constructive.
After a year watching your posts I have come to the conclusion that you probably still 
don't get it : you are the problem.
You are part of that private list and  have therefore the same responsibility as the 
other PMC members.
If you think as a PMC member (you are that according to the jakarta website) that 
something should be in the open, just do it, instead of just saying that everything is 
decided in private without saying what is private.(that is even WORSE than keeping it 
private!)
I think you are way out of line here blaming others, start looking at yourself for 
once!
Hope to hear some constructive things from you in the future..
I don't expect a response from you, since you said you would never want to have 
anything to do with me, so I respect that.

Mvgr,
Martin



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
Radical view: allow the subprojects to send 1-2 delegates to the PMC and
require each subproject to send one or die.  This would size the PMC, assure
that heart attack in the crowd syndrome doesn't take place and make the
discussion more manageable.  Have the sub projects manage their own policy
for who to send and for how long under threat of being closed.  This also
prevents PMC for life syndrome and makes sure that the PMC serves not only
the boards interests but the committers of the projects.  It also puts
pressure on PMC members to keep discussions public.

-Andy
-- 
Andrew C. Oliver
http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp
Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI

http://jakarta.apache.org/poi
For Java and Excel, Got POI?

The views expressed in this email are those of the author and are almost
definitely not shared by the Apache Software Foundation, its board or its
general membership.  In fact they probably most definitively disagree with
everything espoused in the above email.

 From: Craig R. McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:26:44 -0800
 To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED], Harish Krishnaswamy
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?
 
 Quoting Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 
 Could someone please explain the motivation behind the creation of Jakarta
 and how it got to where
 it is today? May be that would help answer some of the questions we have?
 
 -Harish
 
 
 These comments are going to be (like anyone's would be) colored by my own
 personal experiences during the development of Jakarta -- including my
 ignorance of a lot of the details in subprojects that I'm not an active
 participant.  But it should give you a little feel for the history of the
 place.
 
 The gist of the creation of Jakarta was around three facts:
 
 * Apache wasn't an incorporated entity (this is about
 four years ago now), but wanted to be -- and was
 formally becoming the Apache Software Foundation.
 
 * Apache had a project to build a servlet container
 (Apache JServ) at a website called java.apache.org
 which created a trademark-use issue around java.
 (I was a committer on Apache JServ, which is how I
 originally got involved in open source software.)
 
 * Sun wanted to contribute, and Apache wanted to accept,
 the source code for the servlet and JSP implementation
 called the Java Servlet Development Kit, and later
 published by Apache as Tomcat 3.0.
 
 Just as an item of slight historical interest, Jakarta was the name of the
 conference room at Sun where a lot of the early discussions took place.
 
 An organizational framework to focus on developing open source server side
 Java
 stuff was created to host these initiatives, and other related subprojects
 got
 proposed and added to the mix.  As the number of Jakarta committers scaled
 from
 the original 10 or so to where we are today (hundreds), the original charter
 has
 become, umm, somewhat stretched.
 
 Ironically, it didn't take long at all for the scope of that original charter
 to
 get exceeded, because one of the little nuggets of code that was included in
 the
 original Tomcat contribution was a pure-Java build tool (to replace make)
 called Ant ...
 
 As more and more subprojects were added, there were some inevitable cases of
 overlapping scope, and overlapping implementations of the same ideas.  One of
 the best things we've done (IMHO) was purposely creating a subproject
 (jakarta-commons) focused on making small, focused, reusable packages, and
 encouraging the larger projects to use them.  Not only has this been
 successful
 within Jakarta -- there's been quite a lot of cross-fertilization among the
 web
 app frameworks, for example -- it's also created a fairly rich library of
 funcational packages that are widely used elsewhere.  But one could really
 argue whether something like Commons Digester (originally designed as an
 easy-to-use tool to parse XML configuration files) really fit the Jakarta
 charter.
 
 Over time, there have been more than a few, err, voluminous discussions
 about
 how to scale up Jakarta from an organizational perspective, and whether the
 fundamental organizing principle was still the correct one.  Does a focus on
 server side stuff exclude what could be some really interesting open source
 projects?  Does a focus on Java make sense when just across the website there
 are things like xml.apache.org that are focused on a technology, not on an
 implementation language?  Does it make sense to have community type projects
 that host individual software package projects at all?
 
 Coupled with these increasing concerns (at the ASF board level) about the
 ability of any oversight group (a responsibility delegated to PMCs in the ASF
 organizational structure), several original Jakarta subprojects (or even
 sub-sub-projects in some cases) 

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Michael Davey
Ted Husted wrote:

Michael Davey wrote:

Jakarta is the *brand*.  It defines itself.  Jakarta brand 
development. A brand can give a unique identity and grouping to an 
otherwise disparate and commodity range of goods and services.  


Apache is a brand too, and, IMHO, a much stronger brand than Jakarta. 
The relative brand strengths aren't important to this discussion (I 
think we will have to agree to disagree in any case).  I was simply 
attempting to demonstrate two points:
 *  a brand can unify products that otherwise would have no business 
being together
 *  a brand can be used to give a concrete definition of otherwise 
abstract, ill-defined or hard-to-grasp concepts

I realize that there are people who have romantic notions about 
Jakarta and like to talk about preserving Jakarta for Jakarta's 
sake. But for the life of me, I can't see why. For me, it's always 
been about the codebase and its community. [snip] I go where my 
community lives; and my community is centered on a codebase, not a 
hostname. 
[snip]

All along, there have been people who envisioned a Jakarta 
community. But, what's the point of that, really? We already have the 
Apache community and the open source community. Why do we need another 
community within a community?
To me, there is a difference between the Jakarta community and the 
Apache community.  I think that the Jakarta community have a slightly 
different set of values than the wider Apache community.  The values 
aren't wildly different, but they are different none the less.  I think 
that this difference is most noticable in the discussions on lists like 
this.

Now I'm not entirely sure I explicitly know both sets of values.  In 
part this is because there is a difference between what the community 
claims as its values and how the community acts and in part because many 
of the values that the Jakarta community claims aren't written down.

Certainly, the Jakarta community tend to go about their business in a 
slightly different way to the wider Apache community.  Sometimes, the 
Jakarta way seems to work better or seems to be leading the way (for 
instance near-total transparency and openness, even when in means 
airing your dirty laundry, or commons and commons-sandbox) and 
sometimes the Jakarta way demonstrates that it hasn't learned the 
lessons that the wider Apache community learned the hard way (such as 
keeping secret the rationale for blocking an admision to a board of people).

Perhaps there is actually a The Jakarta Way that is similar to The 
Apache Way, that is not explicit right now.   Such a term could 
encapsulate the Jakarta process, approach to the community and values.

The real, underlying issue with Jakarta is that most of our products 
are *not* about Java. They are about a feature set. Java was just a 
convenient implementation language, but most of our products could be 
implemented in other languages and made available to a broader community. 
Agreed.

My fear is that if we don't work now to really understand The Jakarta 
Way, install the good bits into The Apache Way and document the problems 
and solutions to the bad bits, ASF may loose something of real worth and 
may not ever truely recover.  I am not sentimental about the Jakarta 
name, but I do recognise that Jakarta represents something unique that 
we are in danger of loosing.

--
Michael


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Harish Krishnaswamy
Thanks Craig, this is elaborate, informative and puts the issue in my perspective. May be this 
should be put on the website too somewhere.

Here are my inferences so far...

inferences
ASF is a group of projects administered by the Apache board members. The board delegates certain 
responsibilities over to the PMCs of the individual projects while still maintaining the authority 
and management responsibilities. The PMC is responsible for a wholesome code and community of the 
project it oversees but does not have the authority to recognize new projects.

Jakarta started out as a single project for a web container and has grown into a foundation of 
projects in itself without sufficient administration/organization.
/inferences

Here are my thoughts distilled from a lot others'...

* I think the projects at ASF should be classified in some way (preferably by technology like we 
have now for xml, db etc.) into umbrella projects. All projects piled together at the top level 
would not convey very well. This is where Jakarta would need redefinition. Seems like the inital 
motivation, server side web development, is a good fit. And that would mean some reshuffling.
* I think each umbrella project or each project within could have a PMC and each project should 
maintain a PMC membership of atleast 51% of its committers to sustain.
* I think the website should match the organizational structure to avoid confusion.
* I think the board should classify the newly adopted projects. Projects that churn out of existing 
projects should be brought back to the board for classification at the time of creating new CVS 
repositories.
* Each umbrella could have a commons and a sandbox to share and play.
* There could be a top level commons to house cross-umbrella components.

It seems like what we now have is pretty much in good shape and only means that the following 
actions take place...

* Reorganize Jakarta (and may be others??)
* Enforce project level PMC membership
Just my thoughts.

Regards,
Harish
Craig R. McClanahan wrote:

Quoting Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


Could someone please explain the motivation behind the creation of Jakarta
and how it got to where 
it is today? May be that would help answer some of the questions we have?

-Harish



These comments are going to be (like anyone's would be) colored by my own
personal experiences during the development of Jakarta -- including my
ignorance of a lot of the details in subprojects that I'm not an active
participant.  But it should give you a little feel for the history of the
place.
The gist of the creation of Jakarta was around three facts:

* Apache wasn't an incorporated entity (this is about
  four years ago now), but wanted to be -- and was
  formally becoming the Apache Software Foundation.
* Apache had a project to build a servlet container
  (Apache JServ) at a website called java.apache.org
  which created a trademark-use issue around java.
  (I was a committer on Apache JServ, which is how I
  originally got involved in open source software.)
* Sun wanted to contribute, and Apache wanted to accept,
  the source code for the servlet and JSP implementation
  called the Java Servlet Development Kit, and later
  published by Apache as Tomcat 3.0.
Just as an item of slight historical interest, Jakarta was the name of the
conference room at Sun where a lot of the early discussions took place.
An organizational framework to focus on developing open source server side Java
stuff was created to host these initiatives, and other related subprojects got
proposed and added to the mix.  As the number of Jakarta committers scaled from
the original 10 or so to where we are today (hundreds), the original charter
has
become, umm, somewhat stretched.
Ironically, it didn't take long at all for the scope of that original charter to
get exceeded, because one of the little nuggets of code that was included in
the
original Tomcat contribution was a pure-Java build tool (to replace make)
called Ant ...
As more and more subprojects were added, there were some inevitable cases of
overlapping scope, and overlapping implementations of the same ideas.  One of
the best things we've done (IMHO) was purposely creating a subproject
(jakarta-commons) focused on making small, focused, reusable packages, and
encouraging the larger projects to use them.  Not only has this been successful
within Jakarta -- there's been quite a lot of cross-fertilization among the web
app frameworks, for example -- it's also created a fairly rich library of
funcational packages that are widely used elsewhere.  But one could really
argue whether something like Commons Digester (originally designed as an
easy-to-use tool to parse XML configuration files) really fit the Jakarta
charter.
Over time, there have been more than a few, err, voluminous discussions about
how to scale up Jakarta from an organizational perspective, and whether the
fundamental organizing principle was still the correct one.  

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Craig R. McClanahan
Quoting Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Thanks Craig, this is elaborate, informative and puts the issue in my
 perspective. May be this 
 should be put on the website too somewhere.
 
 Here are my inferences so far...
 
 inferences
 ASF is a group of projects administered by the Apache board members. The
 board delegates certain 
 responsibilities over to the PMCs of the individual projects while still
 maintaining the authority 
 and management responsibilities. The PMC is responsible for a wholesome code
 and community of the 
 project it oversees but does not have the authority to recognize new
 projects.
 
 Jakarta started out as a single project for a web container and has grown
 into a foundation of 
 projects in itself without sufficient administration/organization.
 /inferences
 

Waiting for the bureacracy to be created first is kind of antithetical to the
way most open source developers think :-).

 Here are my thoughts distilled from a lot others'...
 
 * I think the projects at ASF should be classified in some way (preferably by
 technology like we 
 have now for xml, db etc.) into umbrella projects. All projects piled
 together at the top level 
 would not convey very well. This is where Jakarta would need redefinition.
 Seems like the inital 
 motivation, server side web development, is a good fit. And that would mean
 some reshuffling.

The problem with graph shaped (single inheritance) hierarchies is that
sometimes a single project fits more than one place.  For example, where do you
put Cocoon?  It's clearly a thing that fits into an XML Technologies sort of
place.  It's also a thing that clearly fits into a server site technologies
sort of place.  The answer that Cocoon chose (the right one, IMHO) was to be a
separate TLP that is *linked* to both of those technology's web sites.

But, the more fundamental principle is that the legal organization of the ASF
need not have anything at all to do with how websites are organized and how
projects are made visible.

 * I think each umbrella project or each project within could have a PMC and
 each project should 
 maintain a PMC membership of atleast 51% of its committers to sustain.

That's pretty much the way that Jakarta works now (we've focused on expanding
the PMC membership over the last year to ensure coverage from all the
subprojects).  But, as a Jakarta PMC member, it's still a daunting thought to
be held responsible for oversight of all the code, and all the releases, across
all of Jakarta.  It's hard enough for me, for example, just to stay current on
the three projects I watch and try to participate in (Commons, Struts, Tomcat).
 I'm pretty clueless about what the Tapestry folks are doing, yet *I* need to
approve releases?

Having Tapestry committers on the PMC helps, but isn't sufficient.

 * I think the website should match the organizational structure to avoid
 confusion.

I don't agree.  The website(s) should be focused around making it easy for users
to  find out what Apache projects might have products that are relevant to
their needs.  The internal project organization is an implementation detail.

 * I think the board should classify the newly adopted projects. Projects that
 churn out of existing 
 projects should be brought back to the board for classification at the time
 of creating new CVS 
 repositories.
 * Each umbrella could have a commons and a sandbox to share and play.
 * There could be a top level commons to house cross-umbrella components.
 
 It seems like what we now have is pretty much in good shape and only means
 that the following 
 actions take place...
 
 * Reorganize Jakarta (and may be others??)

The interesting question is what Jakarta becomes after the subprojects that want
to become TLPs do so.  I suspect that keeping it as a brand is likely to be
helpful, but the brand has been pretty muddled too (is it Apache Struts or
Jakarta Struts?  Depends on which book title you read :-), and the earlier
perceptions that Jakarta had for high quality server side Java code is starting
to slip.

 * Enforce project level PMC membership
 

IMHO, it's just not good enough to satisfy the oversight requirements delegated
to the PMCs by the ASF Board.

 Just my thoughts.
 
 Regards,
 Harish
 

Craig


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Ted Husted
Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
ASF is a group of projects administered by the Apache board members. The 
board delegates certain responsibilities over to the PMCs of the 
individual projects while still maintaining the authority and management 
responsibilities. The PMC is responsible for a wholesome code and 
community of the project it oversees but does not have the authority to 
recognize new projects.
I'd say it the other way around. The ASF is a collection of communities 
that create and maintain codebases. To obtain infrastructure support and 
some legal protection, these communities donate the copyright of its 
software and ownership of its brand to the Foundation. In order to 
provide legal protection and watchdog its copyright, the board assigns a 
vice president to oversee the project. A committee is also convened to 
assist the VP with oversight.

Since the committee is formed by a resolution of the board, its members 
are eligible for legal protection in the event of a lawsuit. Also, since 
the committee is the only formal body created by the board, only the 
votes of committee members are considered binding. In the normal 
course, most or all of the committers are also committee members. 
(Jakarta being an anomaly.)

In most cases, the community's codebase is focussed on a single product, 
and so all the committee members and committers are in tune with what 
is happening with it. The ASF has also been exploring the idea of 
umbrella projects like Jakarta, XML, Database, and Web Services. At 
this time, there is no clear consensus of whether these umbrella 
projects can function as well as the traditional projects.

A very subtle concept is that the ASF doesn't actually own the 
codebase. The codebase belongs to its community, and under the Apache 
License, that community can always vote with its feet. Since it is the 
community that gives the software its value (by using and maintaining 
it), there is an Apache belief that the community is the true owner of 
the codebase. The ASF just owns the brand and yesterday's copyright.

The board is *very* sensitive to the needs of its communities. Software 
versions come and go, but communities endure.

-Ted.





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Costin Manolache
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Radical view: allow the subprojects to send 1-2 delegates to the PMC and
require each subproject to send one or die.  This would size the PMC, assure
that heart attack in the crowd syndrome doesn't take place and make the
discussion more manageable.  Have the sub projects manage their own policy
for who to send and for how long under threat of being closed.  This also
prevents PMC for life syndrome and makes sure that the PMC serves not only
the boards interests but the committers of the projects.  It also puts
pressure on PMC members to keep discussions public.
I don't like this 1-2 delegates. All active committers in a subproject 
should be in the PMC ( unless they don't want to ).

The concern that there are too many people is absurd. What is missing is
a bit of discipline in proposals/votes - and that has nothing to do with 
the number of people.

As you said, all discussions should happen on jakarta-general - so each 
jakarta committer ( including those who chose not to be in PMC ) get to
participate and express their opinion. The vote should be on 
jakarta-general too ( counting as binding only PMC member votes, of 
course ).

The difference between committers who are in PMC and the other should be 
only in the counting of the votes.

The other argument - that nobody can or want to be responsible for 
codebases he is not involved with - is also bad. Each PMC member is
overseeing whatever he chooses to ( typically the projects he is 
involved with and some he voluunteers to ). Every member of the PMC
can vote on any issue - but it is common sense that those who are not
involved with a codebase will abstain ( unless they have a good reason 
not to ).

Costin











-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Just in case you're curious

2003-12-19 Thread Rainer Klute
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:23:16 -0500 Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  For the record I'm in favour of transacting business HERE.
  But I would like to respond by saying that as I understand it it is the
  source and the development of it which is open, not the organisation.
 
 As a committer I would like to know what's going on with the origanization. I can 
 understand certain 
 private conversations that involve legal implications, but anything else, I think, 
 should be out in 
 the open to do justice to the committers. It seems like there is some talk going on 
 about the 
 Jakarta banner in private that I have no clue about. I would appreciate the 
 knowledge sharing in 
 such metters.

That's just as I see it. Discussions should definetly take place HERE.

Best regards
Rainer Klute

   Rainer Klute IT-Consulting GmbH
  Dipl.-Inform.
  Rainer Klute E-Mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  K├Ârner Grund 24  Telefon: +49 172 2324824
D-44143 Dortmund   Telefax: +49 231 5349423

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Costin Manolache
Ted Husted wrote:
Michael Davey wrote:

Jakarta is the *brand*.  It defines itself.  Jakarta brand 
development. A brand can give a unique identity and grouping to an 
otherwise disparate and commodity range of goods and services.  


Apache is a brand too, and, IMHO, a much stronger brand than Jakarta.

I believe Jakarta distracts people from the fact that everything we do 
here is on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation. We are not Jakarta 
Committers, we are Apache Committers. We use the Apache License, 
package our product for apache.org, check code into cvs.apache.org, and 
donate every line to the Apache Software Foundation.
We are apache committers - but each apache committer is also httpd 
committer or cocoon committer or jakarta comitter.

You can't deny that HTTPD has a community of people, just like jakarta 
- which is not identical with the whole ASF ( even if ASF was originally 
the HTTPD community ).

ASF is a collection of communities - some bigger, some smaller. Jakarta 
happens to be the bigger - and as long as you believe we are jakarta 
committers, you should also accept that jakarta _is_ a community just 
like httpd.

A lot of people seem to have a problem with us feeling part of jakarta 
- and at the same time denying that jakarta is a community.

IMO TLP is very closely related to community - in the sense that each 
TLP is or should be centered around a community.




I realize that there are people who have romantic notions about 
Jakarta and like to talk about preserving Jakarta for Jakarta's sake. 
But for the life of me, I can't see why. For me, it's always been about 
the codebase and its community. If a product I use is hosted at 
SourceForge, I work at SourceForge. If it's hosted at Jakarta, I work at 
Jakarta. If it's a top-level ASF project, then I work there. I go where 
my community lives; and my community is centered on a codebase, not a 
hostname.
I think it's not about codebase or hostname, but it is about community.

As long as a project choose to remain part of jakarta - and refer to 
themself as jakarta committer - they are part of the jakarta 
community, just like an HTTPD committer is part of the httpd community.

And a community with people from struts + tomcat + velocity + taglibs + 
cactus + POI +  ( whatever projects choose to remain part of jakarta 
) is IMO stronger that N separate TLPs, sourceforge-style.




There are people who have called Jakarta a jewel. I'd agree that 
Cactus is a jewel, as is Lucene, and Velocity, and all the other 
*communities* we've built around our codebases. But Jakarta is not the 
jewel, at best it's a jewelry box.
The fact that people from velocity, struts, poi, etc are all involved in 
this discussion about jakarta should mean that jakarta is a bit more 
than a sourceforge.



All along, there have been people who envisioned a Jakarta community. 
But, what's the point of that, really? We already have the Apache 
community and the open source community. Why do we need another 
community within a community? What's the point of another layer of 
indirection?
And if each codebase in jakarta becomes a TLP - wouldn't this be another
level if indirection ?
Apache community and open source community are all great - but both of 
them are one way or another an umbrella for multiple smaller communities.

ASF is the real umbrella - not jakarta.

Jakarta has multiple codebases and it started as an umbrella - but we 
managed to act and be perceived as a community. Not a perfect community.



And look what's happening with logging: Now that it's a TLP, they are 
bringing-in the various Log4J compatibles. Now, there can be one Apache 
logging project serving every platform. That's community-building!
Is logkit included in the logging TLP ? What about commons-logging ?

I agree with you that the logging TLP does define a community ( just 
like  jakarta or httpd ). It's a separate PMC bringing togheter 
different codebases and people.

It remains to be seen if log4j as a TLP will be better than log4j as 
part of jakarta. There are plenty of TLPs - like apache-commons - that
don't seem to be much better than sub-projects like jakarta-commons.



Costin



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

2003-12-19 Thread Costin Manolache
Bill Barker wrote:
I'm sure that Craig or other will correct my mistakes (I haven't been here
quite that long :).
Jakarta started as Tomcat and friends after Sun donated Tomcat to the ASF
(hence the name 'Jakarta' :).  As the project grew (sign of success),
Jakarta grew to include projects that don't necessarily rely on Tomcat (but
could be used with), nor that Tomcat relies on.  This has been the
traditional server-side-java test.
Now, Jakarta has been having projects that want to leave to ASF-TLP status
(e.g. log4j, ant, maven, james).  This is calling into question what the
'Jakarta' name stands for now.  What this thread is about is trying to
answer this question:  what, if any, is the mission of 'Jakarta' going
forward.


I think Tomcat and friends remains an excelent definition :-)

( it's the friends part that is important - tomcat just happens to be
the first project in jakarta :-)


Costin



- Original Message - 
From: Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?



Could someone please explain the motivation behind the creation of Jakarta
and how it got to where

it is today? May be that would help answer some of the questions we have?

-Harish



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL.  If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this message and any attachments.

In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.





-
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]


cvs commit: jakarta-site2/xdocs/site newbie.xml

2003-12-19 Thread tetsuya
tetsuya 2003/12/19 16:45:54

  Modified:docs/site newbie.html
   xdocs/site newbie.xml
  Log:
  Added more links to developers' resources
  
  Revision  ChangesPath
  1.45  +19 -0 jakarta-site2/docs/site/newbie.html
  
  Index: newbie.html
  ===
  RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/docs/site/newbie.html,v
  retrieving revision 1.44
  retrieving revision 1.45
  diff -u -r1.44 -r1.45
  --- newbie.html   14 Dec 2003 00:21:16 -  1.44
  +++ newbie.html   20 Dec 2003 00:45:54 -  1.45
  @@ -253,6 +253,9 @@
 li
   a href=#How do I setup my email account?How do I setup my email account?/a
 /li
  +  li
  +a href=#Other Resources?Other Resources?/a
  +  /li
   
 /ul
   /blockquote
  @@ -635,6 +638,22 @@
   blockquote
   p
   See the instruction described a 
href=http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#mail;here/a for more details.
  +/p
  +/blockquote
  +/p
  +  /td/tr
  +  trtdbr//td/tr
  +/table
  +table border=0 cellspacing=0 
cellpadding=2 width=100%
  +  trtd bgcolor=#525D76
  +font color=#ff face=arial,helvetica,sanserif
  +  a name=Other Resources?strongOther Resources?/strong/a
  +/font
  +  /td/tr
  +  trtd
  +blockquote
  +p
  +a href=http://www.apache.org/foundation;Apache Software Foundation 
Website/a and a href=http://www.apache.org/dev/;Developers Resources/a might 
give you more useful information.
   /p
   /blockquote
   /p
  
  
  
  1.11  +9 -0  jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/newbie.xml
  
  Index: newbie.xml
  ===
  RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/newbie.xml,v
  retrieving revision 1.10
  retrieving revision 1.11
  diff -u -r1.10 -r1.11
  --- newbie.xml14 Dec 2003 00:21:16 -  1.10
  +++ newbie.xml20 Dec 2003 00:45:54 -  1.11
  @@ -59,6 +59,9 @@
 li
   a href=#How do I setup my email account?How do I setup my email account?/a
 /li
  +  li
  +a href=#Other Resources?Other Resources?/a
  +  /li
   
 /ul
   
  @@ -337,6 +340,12 @@
 section name=How do I setup my email account?
   p
   See the instruction described a 
href=http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#mail;here/a for more details.
  +/p
  +  /section
  +
  +  section name=Other Resources?
  +p
  +a href=http://www.apache.org/foundation;Apache Software Foundation 
Website/a and a href=http://www.apache.org/dev/;Developers Resources/a might 
give you more useful information.
   /p
 /section
   
  
  
  

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



cvs commit: jakarta-site2/xdocs/site elsewhere.xml

2003-12-19 Thread tetsuya
tetsuya 2003/12/19 16:54:54

  Modified:docs index.html
   docs/site elsewhere.html
   xdocsindex.xml
   xdocs/site elsewhere.xml
  Log:
  18 December 2003 - Apache Ant 1.6.0 Released !
  
  Congratulations!
  
  Revision  ChangesPath
  1.350 +1 -1  jakarta-site2/docs/index.html
  
  Index: index.html
  ===
  RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/docs/index.html,v
  retrieving revision 1.349
  retrieving revision 1.350
  diff -u -r1.349 -r1.350
  --- index.html12 Dec 2003 12:44:14 -  1.349
  +++ index.html20 Dec 2003 00:54:53 -  1.350
  @@ -249,11 +249,11 @@
   h4Other news from a 
href=site/news.htmlJakarta/a 
   and a href=site/elsewhere.htmlElsewhere/a/h4
   ul
  +lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031218.118 December 2003 - 
bApache Ant 1.6.0/b Released/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031203.103 December 2003 - 
bXerces-C 2.4.0 is now available/b/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031201.101 December 2003 - 
bApache Axis C++ v1.0 (Beta)/b Released/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031121.121 November 2003- 
bXerces-J 2.6.0/b Released/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031120.120 November 2003- 
bIncubated-JaxMe 0.2/b Released/a/li
  -lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031114.114 November 2003 - 
bApache Cocoon 2.1.3/b Released/a/li
   /ul
   /blockquote
   /p
  
  
  
  1.105 +32 -1 jakarta-site2/docs/site/elsewhere.html
  
  Index: elsewhere.html
  ===
  RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/docs/site/elsewhere.html,v
  retrieving revision 1.104
  retrieving revision 1.105
  diff -u -r1.104 -r1.105
  --- elsewhere.html12 Dec 2003 12:44:14 -  1.104
  +++ elsewhere.html20 Dec 2003 00:54:54 -  1.105
  @@ -195,7 +195,38 @@
 /td/tr
 trtd
   blockquote
  -a name=20031203.1
  +a name=20031218.1
  +h318 December 2003 - Apache Ant 1.6.0 Released/h3
  +/a
  +p
  +The Apache Ant Team and Apache Software Foundation are happy to announce that 
Apache Ant 1.6.0 is now available.
  +/p
  +p
  +You can download the latest Ant from
  +ul
  +liBinary Distribution: a 
href=http://ant.apache.org/bindownload.cgi;http://ant.apache.org/bindownload.cgi/a/li
  +liSource Distribution: a 
href=http://ant.apache.org/srcdownload.cgi;http://ant.apache.org/srcdownload.cgi/a/li
  +/ul
  +/p
  +p
  +Thanks to all the people who have contributed to Ant, who have sent
  +critics, comments, patches, questions, ...br /
  +For the ones who have sent patches or bug reports which are not yet
  +processed, keep chiming in to remind us of your issues , hopefully we
  +will be able to solve them.
  +/p
  +p
  +We have done our best to offer new features such as antlib, macrodef,
  +presetdef, ssh tasks, ... and to fix bugs.
  +/p
  +p
  +A lot of luck with the use of ant 1.6.0.
  +/p
  +p
  +For more information, take a glance at a href=http://ant.apache.org/;Apache Ant 
Website/a. Enjoy!
  +/p
  +hr noshade=noshade size=1 /
  +a name=20031203.1
   h303 December 2003 - Xerces-C 2.4.0 is now available/h3
   /a
   p
  
  
  
  1.288 +1 -1  jakarta-site2/xdocs/index.xml
  
  Index: index.xml
  ===
  RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/xdocs/index.xml,v
  retrieving revision 1.287
  retrieving revision 1.288
  diff -u -r1.287 -r1.288
  --- index.xml 12 Dec 2003 12:44:14 -  1.287
  +++ index.xml 20 Dec 2003 00:54:54 -  1.288
  @@ -56,11 +56,11 @@
   h4Other news from a href=site/news.htmlJakarta/a 
   and a href=site/elsewhere.htmlElsewhere/a/h4
   ul
  +lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031218.118 December 2003 - 
bApache Ant 1.6.0/b Released/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031203.103 December 2003 - 
bXerces-C 2.4.0 is now available/b/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031201.101 December 2003 - 
bApache Axis C++ v1.0 (Beta)/b Released/a/li
   lia href=site/elsewhere.html#20031121.121 November 2003- 
bXerces-J 2.6.0/b Released/a/li
   lia