Re: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: > On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 20:43, Daniel Rall wrote: > >> Given Robert's description of his experience with the Incubator, I'm for >> the Jakarta Commons to gather some community (direct drop rather than >> sandbox route), with the goal of an eventual promotion to a full >> sub-project. > > +1 but direct drop only if the move to the commons is accompanied by a > release (1.0 or 0.something, I don't care). Else it would not be fair to > many other sub-projects currently in the sandbox which have been kept > there because there is no release (commons-configuration e.g.). There is also the problem of external dependencies ( if any ). At least some of the people on commons preffer commons as more-or-less standalone tools, that don't require a lot of 'framework'. I don't know JCS, but if it can be used as a standalone library - it would be great to get it into commons. Costin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
You're kind of being excessively abrasive especially given that I'm just trying to understand the problem as a responsible PMC member. Given that I'm trying to find out about the subject despite having no ties to Turbine or JCS, I'd expect a little less of an obnoxious response. This post certainly doesn't make me want to volunteer to understand the matter or work towards its resolution. On 12/5/03 1:06 AM, "Henning Schmiedehausen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 23:35, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: >> So far it sounds to me like JCS is only used by Turbine and that only the >> Turbiners really care about it. Thus I don't see why it doesn't just get >> flattened into Turbine and just consider it "one more turbine service". > > +--+ > | Don't | > | feed the | > | Troll! | > +--+ >|| >|| >|| > / \__ > > Come on Andrew, even you can do better than that! > > Obviously you haven't read s single article in this thread, did you?. > JCS is neither a "Turbine Service", nor is it used by Turbine at all. > The fact that it has been developed under the "Turbine label", well it > just happened. But JCS neither depends on Turbine nor the other way > round. So IMHO it is time to move this (IMHO quite decent) project to a > place where it gets much more attention. > > Regards > Henning -- 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. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
On 12/5/03 2:45 AM, "Martin Poeschl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > >> So far it sounds to me like JCS is only used by Turbine and that only the >> Turbiners really care about it. >> > it is indirectly used by turbine ... that's why the discussion started ... > it is used by torque, ojb, hibernate, > ok, they are all db related .. but i still do not think jcs is db related .. > I think Hibernate is switching to Jgroups anyhow. >> Thus I don't see why it doesn't just get >> flattened into Turbine and just consider it "one more turbine service". >> >> > please go to the jcs site and RTFM > Been there. That¹s why I asked the question. > > As far as oversight, who on the PMC is on this sub-sub-subproject? > > i am > So where do you want it to land? Where do you feel it should go in the mean time. > we should only support sub-sub project if there is a strong relation to > the sub-project ... e.g turbine-fulcrum (avalon components for turbine) > However, I regard that as more than likely just a component of Turbine. More than likely the community is more or less the same. >> -Andy >> >> * before it is mentioned, on POI we call POIFS and HSSF subprojects but >> they're really just components. They're called subprojects by tradition, >> granted it is ambiguous but I'll leave language pedantry to RMS. ;-) >> >> > what is the definition of a sub-sub project?? > Community/technical division. The difference between POI and HTTPD only at a lower level. There aren't any shared committers between POI and HTTPD. POI isn't required for HTTPD and HTTPD isn't required for POI and if POI were housed as part of HTTPD or HTTPD part of POI it wouldn't make a great deal of sense. This is an exaggeration of course but you get the idea. -Andy > martin > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- 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. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
With regard to who is using JCS (or should!). We use it at http://www.officedepot.com Without it I doubt we would be ranked where we are on http://www.ecommercetimes.com/ectpi/ We added a new persisting backend based on an all Java version of gdbm. I found that in a very old version of w3c's Jigsaw server. We also enhanced the p2p caching based on the hashing algorithm used by Squid. Yes we were going to contribute but at the time the JCS folks were trying to extricate JCS into a standalone CVS code base. Things were in flux to say the least. I have a hard time imagining a substantive website without a JSC component. Forward caching of data is just too critical for site speed and scalability. Quoting from Jakarta "The goal of the Apache Jakarta Project is to provide commercial-quality server solutions, based on the Java Platform, developed in an open and cooperative fashion". >From our perspective JCS is on par with Lucene or Log4j, and even Struts as an invaluable server solution component and deserves equal treatment. Regards, Ray Racine On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 08:08, Brian McCallister wrote: > OJB supports using JCS for distributed caching, but I don't know how > many people actually use it (we don't). There is overlap between OJB > and Turbine contributors > > Arrowhead ASP, a GPL ASP interpreter, ( http://www.tripi.com/arrowhead/ > ) also uses JCS as I know the guy who wrote it =) OTOH I don't think he > has ever submitted a patch or even feedback back to the Turbineers. > > I would prefer to see it split off to its own [sub]project if it has > the community around it, but I cannot commit to contributing to it. > > -Brian > > On Dec 4, 2003, at 5:35 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > So far it sounds to me like JCS is only used by Turbine and that only > > the > > Turbiners really care about it. Thus I don't see why it doesn't just > > get elided - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
