RE: Jakarta Sandbox (was [VOTE])

2006-04-10 Thread Simon Kitching
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 19:19 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Then there is no NEED for a sandbox. As you know, the sandbox predates the Incubator, and AIUI, the Sandbox exists so as to allow experiments without polluting the respository in such manner that would

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Henning Schmiedehausen
On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 00:48 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote: What would be the constraints on what could go in there? Anything, as long as it's written in or for Java? My fault, I thought we'd had a long thread on this before so didn't do much explaining. The same as Commons Sandbox

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread robert burrell donkin
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff. I'm not opposed to a POI-sandbox (indeed we have one but call it scratchpad) for POI-related stuff. However

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Martin Cooper
On 4/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff. I'm not opposed to a POI-sandbox (indeed we have

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Henri Yandell
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Martin Cooper wrote: On 4/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff. I'm

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Martin Cooper
On 4/10/06, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Martin Cooper wrote: On 4/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Torsten Curdt
However Jakarta-sandbox is SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on sourceforge IMO. If you want to start a whole NEW project then do that in the incubator IMO. Why on sourceforge - why not on our infrastructure? What the difference for you? You want every tiny (commons) library go

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Henri Yandell
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Torsten Curdt wrote: However Jakarta-sandbox is SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on sourceforge IMO. If you want to start a whole NEW project then do that in the incubator IMO. Why on sourceforge - why not on our infrastructure? What the difference for you? You

Jakarta Scope

2006-04-10 Thread Henri Yandell
At jakarta.apache.org we say: 1/ The Jakarta Project offers a diverse set of open source Java solutions and is a part of The Apache Software Foundation (ASF) which encourages a collaborative, consensus-based development process under an open software license. 2/ Our charter

Re: [VOTE] Jakarta Sandbox

2006-04-10 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
Why? Do you need something to do? I have many unworked open source tasks that I could pass on. I'm happy to help you along on them. Seriously. Henri Yandell wrote: On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Torsten Curdt wrote: However Jakarta-sandbox is SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on