Re: Database Subproject Discussion : creation of DBCommons ?
On 5/6/02 6:34 PM, Daniel Rall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was thinking that a better name might be 'dataaccess' or something to reflect the fact that the scope isn't just about formal db's. Not sure. We can keep it as 'db' as a working name for now, I suppose. The only other thing that I could come up with was persistence (which probably isn't as good as db...not general enough). I don't like dataaccess because (other than being ugly) it could be construed to preclude data _storage_ (a type of project which db.apache.org might eventually host). Yep on everything but persistence :) -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Database Subproject Discussion : creation of DBCommons ?
On 5/6/02 6:52 PM, Jeff Schnitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about tweaking db enough so that it both pronounces better and has less explicit meaning? I like: dub.apache.org Deebee.apache.org Let someone else figure out acronym meaning later :-) Jeff Schnitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] How many millions of dollars did Andersen spend for the name Accenture? Sounds like some sort of meat seasoning. No MSG! -Original Message- From: Jim Seach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 3:42 PM To: Jakarta General List Subject: Re: Database Subproject Discussion : creation of DBCommons ? I don't have a problem with db, but if that is associated too strongly with relational databases, how about datamanagement or dm? Another option would be just data. Jim Seach -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Criteria for commit access
On 5/24/02 5:28 PM, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Costin Manolache wrote: If one quarter of the new commiters make 1/2 the contributions that people like Sam Ruby did - I'm quite happy. As Mark Twain once said The rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated. But he only said it once. Let us keep the legend alive! :) -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta Newsletter - May 2002
Great stuff! +1 How would you like us to submit articles/notes to you? On 6/5/02 9:57 AM, Rob Oxspring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jakarta Newsletter == Issue: 0 Date: May 2002 [SNIP] -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting quote....
On 6/24/02 11:29 AM, Santiago Gala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fernandez Martinez, Alejandro wrote: Heh, that's funny. Thanks for pointing it out, I would never have imagined that. It has been there since the very beginning. I remember seeing it back in Netscape 2/3 times, when Explorer was barely used at all (95/96, I can't remember). I guess they dropped the parts from Spyglass - wasn't the first IE just a rebranded spyglass browser? -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: localhost:8080 vs localhost???
On 7/18/02 4:04 PM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is that site generated by maven ? ;)) Mvgr, Martin Anakia I hate to admit it here, but the output is .html files which are then processed through PHP. I'm going to be moving away from even using Anakia and just using PHP. PHP is terribly fugly and encourages the worst code design ever, but you can get a lot more done with it in a short amount of time and there is no way in hell I would ever lower myself to using JSP. =) yeah. And it's got a template language called Smarty which is *way* better than velocity!!! :P - Leo, who figured there was another flamefest when he saw all those e-mails and is now eagerly waiting for a picture of a crossdressing jon... geir goes to find his matches... The flamethrower's pilot went out... -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: localhost:8080 vs localhost???
On 7/18/02 4:44 PM, James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [SNIP] I don't want to get into a flamefest about this, but I can't resist correcting two things : Now hack away at this and try to make an application somehow. JSP was simply a natural progression from static html. (DUH!) putting on asbestos shorts Wasn't it a competitive response to ASP? /putting on asbestos shorts I think that learning Velocity or any other framework (besides Struts) would be a waste of MY time, but I don't go a around vomiting my negative opinions on developer lists. (well, until now ;) Velocity isn't a web app framework. It's a template engine that works well as a view layer in web applications. There are lots of frameworks that use Velocity for it's view, including but not limited to Turbine, WebWork, Maverick, Melati, Jpublish, and ActionServlet. It works just fine with Struts - come see what you can do with Velocity and Struts. Even if we don't convert you to the One True Way ®(sm) :) you will at least stop comparing apples and oranges. -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: localhost:8080 vs localhost???
On 7/18/02 6:11 PM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It works just fine with Struts - come see what you can do with Velocity and Struts. Even if we don't convert you to the One True Way ?®(sm) :) you will at least stop comparing apples and oranges. You mean PHP right? :-) ASP.NET.COM.ORG -- Geir Magnusson Jr. Research Development, Adeptra Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-247-1713 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
On 10/7/02 9:56 PM, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
on 2002/10/7 5:41 PM, Martin Cooper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, I know Velocity fans won't like this any better,
but if you bring
the JSP example on that page up to date, using JSTL, you'll
have this:
c:choose
c:when test=${empty param.name}
Hello World
/c:when
c:otherwise
Hello, c:out value=${param.name}/
/c:otherwise
/c:choose
I dunno about you, but I would much rather teach my
non-programmer designers
to type:
#if ($foo)
Hello, $foo
#else
Hello World
#end
You mean this, taken from the page, don't you?
html
headtitleHello/title/head
body
h1
#if ($request.getParameter(name) == null)
Hello World
#else
Hello, $request.getParameter(name)
#end
/h1
/body/html
At least if you're using JSP/JSTL, you don't have to explain method calls to
your non-programmer designers.
I was trying to stay out, but this *always* comes up in these discussions,
and I think it's somewhat disingenuous. First, you have a similar thing in
JSTL, and one added and desginers who work with JavaScript on the client
side get method calls.
It's not differnet than
Than the bunch of pseudo XML programming language junk you quoted
above...ouch, my hands hurt just looking at that...oh wait, people are
supposed to use GUI drag and drop for all of that
stuff...yea...right...
Oh yea, should I mention that Velocity syntax has remained
unchanged since
it was first released as 1.0 (back in April 2001)? I wonder
how many times
JSP/JSTL/Struts/FooBar syntax will need to be brought 'up to date'...
I see no syntax changes, only new tags and attributes.
--
Martin Cooper
WAKE UP PEOPLE.
-jon
--
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
http://studioz.tv/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]+1-203-355-2219 (w)
Adeptra Inc. +1-203-247-1713 (m)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
On 10/8/02 12:13 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/7/02 9:56 PM, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] on 2002/10/7 5:41 PM, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course, I know Velocity fans won't like this [SNIP] At least if you're using JSP/JSTL, you don't have to explain method calls to your non-programmer designers. I was trying to stay out, but this *always* comes up in these discussions, and I think it's somewhat disingenuous. First, you have a similar thing in JSTL, and one added and desginers who work with JavaScript on the client side get method calls. It's not differnet than Sorry - this was a misfire. I didn't complete this... The point was that designers have experience with methods as they call them in JavaScript, and JSTL has operators as well. Like 'empty', right? -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]+1-203-355-2219 (w) Adeptra Inc. +1-203-247-1713 (m) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Developer wishes to donate project to Apache
On 10/11/02 2:55 PM, Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 2002/10/11 9:44 AM, Mike Stover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank Cohen, author of TestMaker software (from www.pushtotest.com) would like to donate the software to Apache (Jakarta). TestMake is similar in purpose to Apache JMeter, but very different in execution. There are possibilities of sharing code between the two projects, and swapping capabilities. Frank would like to open a dialog with whomever is in charge of making any decisions regarding this. Whom should he contact? RTM? http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html -jon Why not bring into Jmeter? -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]+1-203-355-2219 (w) Adeptra Inc. +1-203-247-1713 (m) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PROPOSAL] Tapestry joins Jakarta
On 10/19/02 8:57 PM, Peter Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 20 Oct 2002 09:40, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: on 2002/10/19 4:22 PM, Pier Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to start a new project for a new Servlet Container that is not Tomcat! :-) Let's see how many fans I'm going to get! :-) Pier Yea, let's see if we can move Jetty under Jakarta. =) Well it is faster ... ;) And trivial to embed :) -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]+1-203-355-2219 (w) Adeptra Inc. +1-203-247-1713 (m) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:general-unsubscribe;jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:general-help;jakarta.apache.org
Re: velocity lovers...
Dave's da man... On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 12:20 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: http://www.miceda-data.com/cgi-bin/blosxom/2002/12/04#Java/velocity -Andy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun Is Losing Its Way
On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 07:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Micael, I am sorry that you think of yourself as one to be believed as dim-witted, because I know that I never inferred anything of the sort. Do you have some issues you would like to talk about?. Isn't it ironic how everyone continues bash MicroSoft because they make such horrible products, yet everyone wanted the sourcecode released. If it is such garbage, why would anyone want it??? clip God, some people! clip So we can fix them, or remove the parts that lead to vendor lock-in. For example, I always wanted the source to VisualC++ so I could fix their project file. Instead of some stupid proprietary binary that was almost self-corrupting, I wanted to switch to a readable (fixable) text format like XML. Same with Excel - I used to do real-time financial market data stuff, and we had such problems with Excel sometimes WRT real-time updates via DDE. Now, I think Excel is one of their finest products (that and Intellimouse...), but we had needs that the average user didn't, and were happy to extend the thing if we could... As for my comments being worth the time saying, you and James did read them and feel a need to respond. So maybe they were worth it after all. Aaron micael caraunltd@harb To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] ornet.comcc: Subject: RE: Sun Is Losing Its Way 12/06/02 07:55 PM Please respond to Jakarta General List That is funny James. I really wonder if Aaron can truly believe we are so dim-witted or that anything he said was worth the time saying. God, some people! Micael At 03:14 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, you wrote: the number 1 selling OS In case anyone hasn't seen this yet, I've attached the source code to Windows 2000. -- James Mitchell -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 11:37 AM To: Jakarta General List Subject: Re: Sun Is Losing Its Way Ive been reading this thread and I think it is a bit humorous that some people think that companies that use the open source groupies to generate thier income are not just as minipulative as the proprietary ones. clip. M$ is not looking out for me, that I am sure about. clip. neither is Sun, nor Redhat, nor Debian,... I love open source and the idea of a bunch of people working together for a common goal, but I also think that if someone wants to make a living off of selling thier product, and not support, then they should be allowed to keep their code to themselves. Sometimes I wonder if Sun would whine about Microsoft as much as they do if Sun had the number 1 selling OS. Just my opinion, but I think it's a good one. Aaron Manns -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:general- [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Micael --- This electronic mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information belonging to the sender which may be confidential and legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom this electronic mail transmission was sent as indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of the information contained in this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please delete the message. Thank you -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discussion] jakarta-gump as community property
On Thursday, December 19, 2002, at 12:21 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Gump is now two years old. It has had contributions from over a dozen people, about a half-dozen this month alone. There seems to be a renewed interest in gump (some in response to a little nudging grin). Considering all of this, what I would like to propose is that the contents of jakarta-alexandria/proposal/gump get moved to jakarta-gump, all committers to any jakarta code base be given karma and voting rights on the full contents (descriptors, code, and stylesheets alike) and that a single [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing be created (we are all devs here, right?) Thoughts? As a 'consumer' who benefitted from the daily Gumps of the codebases here at Jakarta, +0 from me. (I have no time to help - but I think a good idea...) -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta PMC report
On Thursday, December 19, 2002, at 07:13 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Come on. Does anyone really *like* XSL? I do. I actually like the declarative model I sometimes have trouble in that processing syntax is not orthogonal to the syntax of what you are generally trying to output (XML, usually). -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ACTION not WORDS Re: A Jakarta wiki?
On Friday, December 20, 2002, at 09:26 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: O'brien, Tim wrote: A non-member, non-commiter, doc patch submitter with three questions here, Would this Wiki be limited to those with commit status? If not, how does this jive with the whole merit-based Apache-way? Does a public wiki have any legal ramifications for ASF? If Wiki is open to the public and someone puts GPL'd or copyrighted material on Wiki, who would bear responsibility? Lets not start with the FUD.. If it happens, we'll remove them. What if someone puts the detailed information on how to produce Anthrax, and hides the secret location of Osama Bin Ladin in a patch submitted which also brilliantly makes Velocity run 300x faster than it does currently so that we have to choose between making the CIA happy or velocity running fast... Then it would be 300x JSP :) -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/os.xml OR Karma for jakarta-site2
On Saturday, December 21, 2002, at 12:08 AM, Pete Kazmier wrote: Could someone either apply the supplied patch for the new OS preference page, or grant me the appropriate karma and I'll do it myself? Added you to os page (I was doing myself when this came in) and granted you karma to jakarta-site2 for the future -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PMC VOTE] Gump subproject
On Friday, December 27, 2002, at 08:16 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: Per previous discussion, it seems that there is wide agreement that the gump code, stylesheets, and data should be updatable by every committer. Towards that end, I plan to move gump from jakarta-alexandria-proposals to jakarta-gump. I also plan to create a single [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. This effectively makes it a jakarta subproject, albeit one with a rather large set of potential committers. I am merely putting this to a formal vote to see if there are any objections. Note that making this a jakarta subproject does not preclude it from becoming an ASF project in the future. Given that this is the holiday season and that all prior discussion did not uncover any negative votes, it is my plan to keep this vote open into the first week of the new year, and to optimisically start with the creation of the cvs and mailing list. Should this resolution not pass, I'll delete and revert all changes. My vote is +1. +1, although... Might you consider adding committers as they ask for karma, in the same way that jakarta-site2 is open to all, but we just add them as they desire to particiapate (making it clear somewhere that it's open to all...)? The only reason I suggest this is that the interested party pops up into the active group's awareness of who's involved... geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PMC VOTE] Gump subproject
On Friday, December 27, 2002, at 08:52 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Might you consider adding committers as they ask for karma, in the same way that jakarta-site2 is open to all, but we just add them as they desire to particiapate (making it clear somewhere that it's open to all...)? The only reason I suggest this is that the interested party pops up into the active group's awareness of who's involved... That's essentially the current rule, but it doesn't stop the whining: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-devm=104099212311029w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-devm=104099390211903w=2 I would think that cvs commit messages would be sufficient for making people aware of activity. Up to you, of course :) It's your baby... -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-355-2219(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nice
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 08:32 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: It's only by understanding the JCP and infiltrating it that we have much chance to try and change it though. The whole thing is just one opaque block from here. We have 'infiltrated' it. The ASF is a member of the J2SE/J2EE executive committee (I am the current representative), and we have many members (and non-members) participating in various JSRs. FYI - Through the significant efforts of Jason Hunter, the previous JCP rep, and others (Chuck Murko, for example), the ASF was instrumental in fostering change in the JCP process, and will continue to do so. There is a JCP mail list, but because of various non-disclosure agreements made by the ASF, it's limited to ASF members, who are bound by the same agreements. If there is sufficient interest in an open JCP discussion list, I'm sure we can set that up. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nice
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 09:38 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: We have 'infiltrated' it. The ASF is a member of the J2SE/J2EE executive committee (I am the current representative), and we have many members (and non-members) participating in various JSRs. Yeah I know. Thus my questions as to whether Apache/you should/could be saying anything against the negative views of the JCP. Of course we/I can/will. It's no secret that Apache had significant problems with the managing process of the JCP, and much effort was invested to improve it. If you remember, Jason Hunter was on stage at last year's JavaOne's announcement of the changes. While there are still plenty of valid issues that people have with the JCP as a whole, or JSRs in specific, the intent of the ASF's participation is to be a constructive advocate of the way we think that standards and software should be developed. We are just one vote of many - we can say our piece, lobby and try to convince others, support our representatives on JSRs, but at the end of the day, we are just one voice. FYI - Through the significant efforts of Jason Hunter, the previous JCP rep, and others (Chuck Murko, for example), the ASF was instrumental in fostering change in the JCP process, and will continue to do so. This is about all I do hear regarding ASF/JCP. What else would you like to know? What are your specific problems? is there a specific technology/spec that you are interested in participating in? have you ever interacted with the expert group of a JSR via their interest list or during a public, community review? I started my participation by just sending comments to the servlet EG, and I found them extremely responsive, far more responsive that I would have expected for a random comment from the ether. Of course, this differs from EG to EG, just like different communities differ on OSS projects. There is a JCP mail list, but because of various non-disclosure agreements made by the ASF, it's limited to ASF members, who are bound by the same agreements. If there is sufficient interest in an open JCP discussion list, I'm sure we can set that up. Just the FAQs. Like, does Apache have a non-profit membership? So that anyone who is an ASF member is able to be on multiple JSRs, or are you all members via your companies? The ASF is a member. Any ASF member is covered by that agreement, and can thus, if they choose, represent the ASF on the EG if the EG accepts. IIRC, non-members can also represent the ASF on an expert group, but it does require JCP agreements to be signed. Remember, it's up to the expert group to accept members for participation. You are free to represent your company, if you choose. As a member through Apache, does that cause any legal contractual issues with employers? That depends upon your employment agreement/contract with your employer. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JCP Process [Was nice ;-)]
On Thursday, January 30, 2003, at 10:30 AM, Santiago Gala wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: (...) It's the compromise we/I willingly make to be able to work inside the process to help shape it the way we/I think it should be shaped. The only alternative is to try to start another standards body, but I think you will find that, like the other standards bodies, that NDA's will be a part of the process if you want serious players to participate. One of the big issues surrounding standards is the inclusion/discussion of proprietary information offered by participating entities (companies). Whether or not you like the existence of commercial entities in the process, they are there. OK, I'll buy the previous paragraph. But that the participants do sign a NDA does not mean that the group is silent throughout the process, as it often happens with current JSRs. While I can understand that some of the discussions should remain secret, I think that partial agreements (or blocked areas), roadmaps, current work, etc. could and should be communicated, and also feedback asked more frequently. At a bare minimum, a JSR should publish something (be it a status report, demo, API proposal, open issue list, recount of activity,...) at least every three months, and use this information to gather feedback from the outside via a public discussion list. Agreed, good supporting feedback, and this is something that is a current topic of interest in the JCP EC. We (the members of the EC, the ASF being a member) are interested in encouraging openness in the process from the start via support for open mail lists, etc, as well as more public reviews. However, it's still up to the JSR leads. I guess one thing I can do as the EC rep is ensure that for every new JSR that comes up for a vote for acceptance to continue, I lobby the spec lead / EG to make it as open as possible. I think the spirit is something along these lines, with the public draft phase, etc., but I think the process can be (and sometimes is) seriously abused. I also think that the temporal granularity of the process was meant to be much smaller than it is becoming, so the concerns I express do apply more and more. Yes - you are right. Another *constructive* suggestion could be having a different role, people that would not be forced to sign a NDA, and thus could only be exposed to public domain information, but who could be involved in the process restricted to this. This would enforce even more the need of regular unrestricted feed back. These people could act as hubs between public lists and the EG. Yes - indeed. The idea is to have more public participation (vote early and often, as they say in Chicago :) in the process w/o the EG having to expand to include only the mildly interested, and w/o having constraints like an NDA placed on the mildly interested participants. One things I'll say in their defense of general spec lead behavior is that a JSR is a *lot* of work - I have garnered great respect in general for those leading JSR's to successful conclusions, so it's hard to want to dictate a project management style... geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Clear the air Re: ATTN: Maven developers [was: primary distri bution location]
On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 02:29 PM, Nick Chalko wrote: I hope to have a proposal started on the Wiki tonight (PST). The Maven repository has been an essential tool for me for me. The next step is to play nice with gump. Then do help with dependencies Also to make it easy for projects to brand themselves with version and dependency information. JJAR in commons sandbox had some of these ideas in there... But can you build this into maven rather than in parallel? -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Clear the air
On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 02:38 PM, Nick Chalko wrote: JJAR has stalled. but maybe restarting that is a good solution. I just wanted to suggest that you might get something out of what was there, not that it should be restarted. I think building outside of maven is a worthwhile because not every one uses maven. Would more people use maven if you 'scratched your itch'? (I really hate that cliche', but it does apply :) I would like to see the tools and standards developed be independent of the build tool. -Original Message- From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 11:36 AM To: Jakarta General List Subject: Re: Clear the air Re: ATTN: Maven developers [was: primary distri bution location] JJAR in commons sandbox had some of these ideas in there... But can you build this into maven rather than in parallel? -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Clear the air
On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 03:01 PM, Nick Chalko wrote: *nod*. +1 on using what Maven currently has, merged with anything Ruper has learnt about being outside of Maven and tested by both the Maven and Centipede communities. -1 to JJAR as it's just never made it into reality. Why use a dead-component, or aspects of it, when there are two versions of a live component in place. sigh Read what I said... -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Clear the air
On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 03:06 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 03:01 PM, Nick Chalko wrote: *nod*. +1 on using what Maven currently has, merged with anything Ruper has learnt about being outside of Maven and tested by both the Maven and Centipede communities. -1 to JJAR as it's just never made it into reality. Why use a dead-component, or aspects of it, when there are two versions of a live component in place. sigh Read what I said... Sorry. I replied to the reply to the reply and not your initial bit *whistle hopefully* :) This is getting silly. All I was saying was that my note about JJAR should not be interpreted as a push to get it going. If I thought that, I'd rekindle it... Geir said: JJAR in commons sandbox had some of these ideas in there... But can you build this into maven rather than in parallel? Apologies, Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposal
Seriously people, just forget this strand of the thread. Jason hasn't slept and is under stress due to family issues. Jason will probably be mad at me for posting this, but I wanted to say something. geir On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 05:30 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 17:26, Jason van Zyl wrote: On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 16:08, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Jason, Can you please add your name to this as a committer and/or a sponsoring member: http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?RuperProposal Also other maven folks? I value your previous experience and existing source code. Can't do it. I will never collaborate on anything with Nicola Ken Barozzi. And if I have to say it in public I will. I would probably participate in anything but not with him. Ah damn, when it rains it pours. The old man is in a coma, I haven't slept in days and I can't read reply-to headers. That was not meant for public consumption. -Andy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PMC Nomination
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Jeffrey Dever wrote: I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases to the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for Commons HttpClient where all committers vote on all issues all the time, including releases. HttpClient is somewhat unusual in commons as it is rather a large project with a dedicated mailing list and a rich family where many, such as myself, are primarily focused on just one project, HttpClient. The goal is to make all active committers PMC members. Would it be quicker just to make all active committers PMC members by default? -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PMC Nomination
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 02:19 PM, Costin Manolache wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Jeffrey Dever wrote: I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases to the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for Commons HttpClient where all committers vote on all issues all the time, including releases. HttpClient is somewhat unusual in commons as it is rather a large project with a dedicated mailing list and a rich family where many, such as myself, are primarily focused on just one project, HttpClient. The goal is to make all active committers PMC members. Would it be quicker just to make all active committers PMC members by default? I think the goal should be that the PMC should include all committers that are active and have been around for a while ( 3..6 months seems reasonable). Agreed I like the current system of proposing release managers - as it encourages people to do this work. Proposing people who are taking a very active role in various projects would also be good. I don't think all active committers should be PMC members by default - maybe after few months if they stick around and continue to be active. Shouldn't it be that a committer has been around for a reasonable amount of time? How else would they be a committer? -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PMC Nomination
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 03:41 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Shouldn't it be that a committer has been around for a reasonable amount of time? How else would they be a committer? From the perspective of other ASF projects (e.g., HTTPD), Jakarta gives out committer-ship like candy. With HTTPD, a track record of approximately six months of sustained patches is required to become a committer. By contrast HTTPD, by Jakarta standards, gives out PMC membership and ASF membership like candy. I want to strike a happy balance. I don't necessarily want to slow down the rate at which people become committers. But I would like to see significantly more Jakarta committers become PMC and ASF members. As long as there's candy :0 - Sam Ruby - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT][PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations
On Friday, February 21, 2003, at 09:43 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: Pier Fumagalli wrote: I am more than you are, as my name pops on and off the proposed PMC members as yours does depending on the mood of the day... Pier, let me make this quite clear: I want you to be a member of the Jakarta PMC. Any time anybody submits your name, I will vote +1. I nominate Pier Fumagalli for membership in the Jakarta PMC, for a period exceeding that of any Italian post-war government. geir - Sam Ruby - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT][PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations
On Friday, February 21, 2003, at 05:23 PM, Jeffrey Dever wrote: Vote results? It unclear even when a vote is taking place and who the nominees are. I thought we just finished a round on the 19th with an agreement that these should be done in batches. Now Pier is up as a nominee again and after one vote from Sam (who suggested the batches in the first place) has already declined! WTF? Batches? we don't need no steenking batches. Seriously - there seems to be quite a bit of angst over this. Since the goal is having the PMC indistinguishable, for the most part, from the committer base, why not do it by invitation? People who positively respond are in... Wouldn't this achieve the goal faster? Last week I was happy working on my project. Then I find out that voting rights on releases will be taken away unless I join the new expanded PMC. But the process appears to be in shambles. When the PMC decided to expand from 7 to up to the number of committers worth of members, nobody thought to spend 45 minutes creating a voting servelt to streamline the process? 98% of us are programmers and all we could come up with was completely chaotic +1/0/-1 on a mailing list? All I want to do is write code and manage HttpClient to a full release. Its all I have time for. Already this PMC chaos is taking more time than I want to spend on it. Cool - can you get rid of the logging dependence? I just started using HttpClient because I gave up on the JDK HttpConnection in disgust, and it's not quite drop-in if it requires logging ;) You guys are freaking me out. Costin Manolache wrote: robert burrell donkin wrote: one of the problems we have in the commons is the number of votes which spawn threads which go on for ever without any clear conclusion. that's why i think that announcing clearly when a vote is finished is a good thing. IMO all vote results should be at least posted to the pmc list. The PMC should be able to at least review the results. Things like adding new dependencies to a project, moving code, releases, major changes need to be very visible to the entire PMC, even if few members are involved in each project. ( dependencies are particulary important, if they are not under apache-like licence ) Costin - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 06:08 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Note that Sun's JCP NDA agreements burn the second and third completely. Utter nonsense. Are you saying that there's a dearth of innovation at apache? Or that Apache doesn't support strong communities? geir And possibly the first (though i'm not a big fan of long standing deprecations.. ). -Andy Thanks Pier. I had wondered when someone would point this out. Having clarity on the facts is very important, because all too often non-reasons distract us from the really important reasons. With respect to having multiple projects doing the same thing, I believe Apache's approach has been very balanced and laudable. You've got 3 fundamental forces at play: + The need to maintain backwards compatibility so you don't burn your existing users. + The desire to continue innovation, advancing our designs and APIs. + The desire to support and recognize strong, healthy developer communities which share the Apache values of innovation, open software, community, and meritocracy. Apache has met all three of these forces in it's decisions to adopt additional projects, such as Struts and Tapestry. Whereas businesses aim to maximize profit, and academia structures to maximize ego, Apache and open source have routinely demonstrated a true commitment to maximizing community. And we are all better off for it. Doug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 06:40 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: No I'm saying that projects which some committers are bound by Sun's NDAs and are on the specification commmittees do not have meritocratic consensus based communities. Do you have any examples of this? You aren't confusing the material I submit to the ASF JCP group from the EC with whatever you are thinking about, are you? The committers engaged in the legal agreement with sun cannot talk to the other committers about important decisions affecting the project and secondly the major decisions are made in the specification committee and not in the project itself. What? How would that work, logically? I mean, if the committers on the JSR are bound by an NDA, and thus can't talk to the committers on a related Apache project, how can they communicate the 'major decisions' from this committee, and inflict them on the project? Some sort of 'double-secret' commit? Add code that no one can look at? There is no project here at the ASF that isn't open for public review. Committers are promoted to the decision making process by an outside entity (sun) and not by their own community. I'm starting to think this is a troll. Committers are promoted by their community. Sun has nothing to do with it. Further, most JSR's have nothing to do with Sun, except that Sun is financing the process management. The spec leads, in conjunction with the expert group, get copyright of the spec, dictate the license terms, etc, etc, etc. Sun has nothing to do with it, unless Sun is the spec lead. I'll be the first to say that the JCP is far from perfect, but what you are saying here doesn't make any sense. The communication bonds twart collaboration which degrades innovation. The JCP does not encourage innovative processes which Sun or the Spec lead might disagree with. There is no reason why a JSR can't be totally open. It's up to the spec lead, as is the license. The innovation to the platform is brought by people like you and me that decide we have an API, technology, etc, that is appropriate for addition to the platform. The innovation happens before the JSR even starts. No one proposes a JSR to do something innovative that we haven't thought of yet. They do something innovative that they have done something with already. So I'll say it more clearly JCP NDAs are anti-communalistic and twart innovation. I'm sure you believe this. Lets talk about what a great thing the portlet specification committee has done for the Jetspeed project. Yes, lets do that. (That's 1 out of 200 or so, so while there may be a problem with that specific JSR, we might have to look at a few more before generalizing.) -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 06:08 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Note that Sun's JCP NDA agreements burn the second and third completely. Utter nonsense. Are you saying that there's a dearth of innovation at apache? Or that Apache doesn't support strong communities? geir And possibly the first (though i'm not a big fan of long standing deprecations.. ). -Andy Thanks Pier. I had wondered when someone would point this out. Having clarity on the facts is very important, because all too often non-reasons distract us from the really important reasons. With respect to having multiple projects doing the same thing, I believe Apache's approach has been very balanced and laudable. You've got 3 fundamental forces at play: + The need to maintain backwards compatibility so you don't burn your existing users. + The desire to continue innovation, advancing our designs and APIs. + The desire to support and recognize strong, healthy developer communities which share the Apache values of innovation, open software, community, and meritocracy. Apache has met all three of these forces in it's decisions to adopt additional projects, such as Struts and Tapestry. Whereas businesses aim to maximize profit, and academia structures to maximize ego, Apache and open source have routinely demonstrated a true commitment to maximizing community. And we are all better off for it. Doug - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 08:21 PM, Costin Manolache wrote: As with any standard, the decision making is based on a group of people representing different interests. Apache does have a vote ( AFAIK ), just like Sun or IBM. Projects should be able to participate - and we should find a way to apply the apache meritocracy and community rules in our participation to JCP ( for example by a vote by committers who are affected or by PMCs ). One way we can do this is for ourselves to do be spec leads for JSR's. Then we can set the rules for the group, and the license. Jetspeed has been around for a while - it was only recently that IBM (and ?) proposed the JSR. We could have done it long before that. The communication bonds twart collaboration which degrades innovation. The JCP does not encourage innovative processes which Sun or the Spec lead might disagree with. The spec is approved by a majority vote. I don't think standard goal should be to innovate - but recognize common patterns and practices and set ground rules. Well - that's one way to describe it. The other way is that the JCP is how innovations are brought to the platform - the innovation was done before you tried to make a JSR. For example, Jason Hunter is running a JSR for JDOM. JDOM was done, and the benefits of the software clear, before he proposed the JSR geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 10:58 PM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: As it turns out, there is substantial room for innovation and debate in the implementation of API specs like servlet and JSP (see the history of Tomcat development, and the recent innovation going on there for an example), just like there is lots of room to be creative in implementing something like HTTP, which has been done, and continues to be done, in a very large number of implementations in a very large number of languages -- despite the fact that the W3C standards process, like many others, includes periods of time when only the privileged few are allowed to be involved. Take it a step further - how many internationally recognized standards processes will allow a single individual to propose, develop and deliver a standard? The JCP will... geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 11:40 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Yeah, on second thought, its a great idea to remove choice in a project and instead submit it to a JSR committee and hence Suns conrol, Andy, you have pretty much the same power over a JSR as Scott McNeely does. The ASF has a vote on the EC, and Sun has a vote on the EC. Why do you think Sun has more control? take a few folks and put them on NDA so that they can't talk about certain decisions which will affect the project. Or make the rules for your JSR to be open. it's up to the spec lead. geir I'm not against all standards...just NDA-based vendor baby kissing. -Andy Craig R. McClanahan wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:09:14 -0500 From: Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects? Thanks Pier. Thats a great perpective. Lets have some more. Anyone have a remarkably positive Gee the JCP listens to everyone and I can disclose everything to my fellow committers and its been great for our community? Andy seems to believe that *implementing* a specification (as opposed to creating one) is not a valid itch to be scratched if he doesn't like the mechanism by which the specification is created. It's perfectly reasonable for Andy to decide that for the projects he gets personally involved in, but it seems awfully arrogant to argue that no one at Apache should involve themselves in such an implementation project on that basis. As it turns out, there is substantial room for innovation and debate in the implementation of API specs like servlet and JSP (see the history of Tomcat development, and the recent innovation going on there for an example), just like there is lots of room to be creative in implementing something like HTTP, which has been done, and continues to be done, in a very large number of implementations in a very large number of languages -- despite the fact that the W3C standards process, like many others, includes periods of time when only the privileged few are allowed to be involved. -Andy Craig McClanahan - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JCP NDA (was: too many similar projects?)
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 01:32 AM, Rich Persaud wrote: I wrote: | Is the NDA under NDA? Or can someone post a copy? Ok, there's no separate NDA, it's part of the standard agreements: http://jcp.org/en/participation/membership Follow-up questions: 1. Is there an Apache-specific, public archive of JCP discussion, including the negotiation of JCP 2.5? This seems to exclude [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Is there a [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? If not, one could be culled from the archives of other lists. I keep offering to setup [EMAIL PROTECTED], but there never is much interest. Sam? Can you setup that list please? Make me the moderator and we'll see what happens 2. Is there an Apache-specific, public archive of the discussion that preceded the decision to make [EMAIL PROTECTED] non-public ? No - because the ASF, as a member of the EC, has signed the agreements that require us to keep the information about our JCP work non-public. Thus, we can't open that list. I, as the current EC representative, submit things to that list which are confidential to the EC, and we have discussions on that list which are private to the ASF. Nothing sinister going on there, but we are just respecting the rules to which we have agreed. And despite the closed aspects of the JCP, I think it's vital that the ASF remain a participant. Apaches has a record for positive change on the JCP, and will continue to push for change in line with our values and philosophy, something we can only do while participating. geir Pier wrote: | Most of the times, in my experience, it all comes down to how receptive | the spec lead is in regards to new ideas coming from outside, and how much | weight he has in his company (the JSR sponsoring company)... | | But my experience is too little to say what happens more often. Are there any metrics on the performance of spec leads, besides: http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/withdrawn.html http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/rejected.html Apache has tools that provide quantitative feedback on the development process. Can any of these be adapted to provide quantitative feedback on the post-public spec development process, using historical (public) data? Spec leads need to be JCP members and there's a $5K threshold for commercial companies. That's a large gap between Tier $0 (Apache and fully open) and Tier $5K (JCP and open/closed per above cited agreements). Is there a subset of Apache members who represent smaller commercial companies, who won't/can't incur the JCP overhead, but who wish to give their customers the benefits of inter-vendor portability and test compliance? Rich - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 03:05 AM, Santiago Gala wrote: Previously: Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Lets talk about what a great thing the portlet specification committee has done for the Jetspeed project. Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Yes, lets do that. (That's 1 out of 200 or so, so while there may be a problem with that specific JSR, we might have to look at a few more before generalizing.) 1 out of 200 is misleading. I think you mean that Andrew had just 1 example out of 200 JSR. Yes - IOW, there are lots of JSR, and even if Andy has legitimate complaints about how the Jetspeed JSR is happening, I can't see how it thus applies to the whole thing. A more adequate comparison would be the other way round: . How many Apache projects are turned into JSR from the outside, not by the developers? I mean from people *not* in the team. (jserv/tomcat, the logging stuff, jetspeed) I bet that's it, please correct me. From the previous Pier email, it looks that we are close to 1.5 out of 3 than to 1 out of 200 (Just twisting as I see fit, following the previous example ;-) The logging stuff was a real problem, and there is a *great* example of what still needs to change in the JCP. I detest the idea of logging in the standard JDK, and even worse, that it's not log4j. BTW, it looks like an excelent metrics for innovation in Open Source that the industry wants to standardize on OS projects. Definitely. And later Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: (...) One way we can do this is for ourselves to do be spec leads for JSR's. Then we can set the rules for the group, and the license. Jetspeed has been around for a while - it was only recently that IBM (and ?) proposed the JSR. We could have done it long before that. It depends on your semantics for recently. A historical account: People from IBM Germany approached the team (Raphael Luta, myself) in autumn 2000 (In the ApacheCON Europe) with a proposal. They were working in what became Websphere Portal Server and it looks like they would base it (partially, I'm sure) on the Jetspeed work. Kevin Burton, the original leader, misteriously disappeared from the project by then. This is how I became the speaker in this ApacheCON. A proposal was sent by the team to the list, and got heavily discussed (IRC, mail list, CVS repository). This (http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ msg05121.html) excellent summary by Raphael Luta, who took most of the formalization effort gives an idea of the situation by Feb 2001. This (http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ msg05089.html) post by Ingo Schuster (IBM voice in the list) gives idea to the level of discussion. After this, two things happened: * For the developers the priority was to stabilize the code base and have a release, *before* jumping to a heavy refactoring. * The IBM team (Ingo was the most visible part) disappeared completely from the public list. I have not been able to find anything in Google from those times, it seems they don't index mbox.gz archives (Please, Ovidiu, make them do it), so historicians will have to resort to http://jakarta.apache.org/mail/jetspeed-dev/ the .gz monthly archives :-) Everybody having more than enough work to do, and nobody really pushing the proposal (DOocrazy) it languished. In Dec 2001, a proposal was presented JSR 162 (Portlet API, Stefan Hepper, IBM http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=162). 6 days later JSR 167 (Java(TM) Portlet Specification, Alejandro Abdelnur, Sun Microsystems s/162/167/ in URL above) was presented. 20 Jan 2002 both were withdrawn, and 168 (with both leads s/167/168/ if you folloed the previous regexp). Crystal clear :) So, the industry jumped in. From then on, only David, Alejandro, Stefan, people in BEA, HP, etc. can tell what is going on. The proposal is not even in the Community Review stage one year later, as far as http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=168 says. In fact, it does not appear in the List JCP by stage page, which means it is still in fuzzyland. Right. So what can you do? I'm assuming that the JetSpeed community didn't stop what they were doing, and second, IIRC, no one from the ASF stepped up to be spec lead. IOW, if we give a hoot about these JSRs, which we should, why don't *we* do it? Either a community a) doesn't want to, in which case it doesn't matter how the Evil Tyrannical Sun That Controls All behaves or b) it does, but only as a participant on the EG (from which info can be shared, I suppose - certainly something that can be negotiated with the leads on the JSR), or c) it does the JSR itself. I can't think of any other options. Thanks for the informative history, BTW. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 08:42 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: One way we can do this is for ourselves to do be spec leads for JSR's. Then we can set the rules for the group, and the license. Jetspeed has been around for a while - it was only recently that IBM (and ?) proposed the JSR. We could have done it long before that. What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? Then do a .NET portlet. Have a great time Well - that's one way to describe it. The other way is that the JCP is how innovations are brought to the platform - the innovation was done before you tried to make a JSR. For example, Jason Hunter is running a JSR for JDOM. JDOM was done, and the benefits of the software clear, before he proposed the JSR So why does he need a JSR? I dunno - can't speak for Jason. I suspect it was because he felt his model was a good one to standardize around. But you have to ask him... geir -Andy geir - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 09:02 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Either a community a) doesn't want to, in which case it doesn't matter how the Evil Tyrannical Sun That Controls All behaves or b) it does, but only as a participant on the EG (from which info can be shared, I suppose - certainly something that can be negotiated with the leads on the JSR), or c) it does the JSR itself. I can't think of any other options. d) Convince everyone that they don't need the silly JCP or JSRs and just set the standards and be real damn clear that we mean to set the de-facto standard while laughing at Ra. OpenSource is the standard. Go for it. -Andy Thanks for the informative history, BTW. geir - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 05:18 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Paulo Silveira wrote: What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? Call it portal.net and change the method names to begin with a capital letter. done. And I don't have the privilege of speaking with Sun's lawyers? Just don't return their calls. -- Paulo - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Thursday, March 13, 2003, at 08:52 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: And I don't have the privilege of speaking with Sun's lawyers? Just don't return their calls. And when I'm fined and held for contempt of court will you be there with me? I had to go back and look at what I had responded to. Here's what I found : - Paulo Silveira wrote: What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? Call it portal.net and change the method names to begin with a capital letter. done. And I don't have the privilege of speaking with Sun's lawyers? Just don't return their calls. I was being flip, I guess. I want to make something clear - I don't advocate violating anyone's copyright or intellectual property claims, nor do I think you do. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 02:53 PM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: On 12/3/03 6:53 Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 10:58 PM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: As it turns out, there is substantial room for innovation and debate in the implementation of API specs like servlet and JSP (see the history of Tomcat development, and the recent innovation going on there for an example), just like there is lots of room to be creative in implementing something like HTTP, which has been done, and continues to be done, in a very large number of implementations in a very large number of languages -- despite the fact that the W3C standards process, like many others, includes periods of time when only the privileged few are allowed to be involved. Take it a step further - how many internationally recognized standards processes will allow a single individual to propose, develop and deliver a standard? The JCP will... Yes, but why can I share with my friends concerns on the new W3C specifications and confront them in public, while I cannot do that with the JCP specifications??? You can do that after they are public specs, right? You can do the same with complete JCP-produced specs. Geir, I _really_ am in troubles when dealing with Servlets. I cannot raise issues on the tomcat-dev mailing lists, all I can do is discuss them with Jon and Jason, as they both are on the spec... I realize this isn't perfect. In some cases, it's not even good, the servlet EG sound like it belongs in the 'not good' category. I think we'd all like to see things changed so that there's a more open process for spec development, and there is a lot of interest on the JCP Exec Committee surrounding this issue. BTW, I *think* that you should be able to discuss the issues with any ASF member, if you are representing the ASF on the EG, not just other EG members. We all are bound by the agreements made by the ASF. geir Pier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 10:02 PM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: On 17/3/03 1:24 Hans Bergsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree that there's been problem with the Servlet EG this time around, but what I'm saying is that there are avenues that we _could_ have used to voice our concerns, but we didn't for some reason. There are a number of mailing lists and online forums where developers interested in the fate of the spec hangs out. We could have started discussions there, and urged people to send feedback to Sun. This is why I feel that my work as the official representative to that EG has been a failure :-( _MY_ failure... Well - it's always easy to look back and see what you could have done differently. Is it too late? geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?
On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 03:08 PM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: On 18/3/03 11:33 Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 10:02 PM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: On 17/3/03 1:24 Hans Bergsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree that there's been problem with the Servlet EG this time around, but what I'm saying is that there are avenues that we _could_ have used to voice our concerns, but we didn't for some reason. There are a number of mailing lists and online forums where developers interested in the fate of the spec hangs out. We could have started discussions there, and urged people to send feedback to Sun. This is why I feel that my work as the official representative to that EG has been a failure :-( _MY_ failure... Well - it's always easy to look back and see what you could have done differently. Is it too late? Yes... Certain new features are in... Not much we can do now... Except vote against it, if that's what the ASF decides to do geir Pier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Proposal] SuperXMailer
You've spent months planning an April Fool's joke? On Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at 08:12 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: :-D I created the sourceforge project months and months ago! With full disclosure as to its purpose. -Andy Costin Manolache wrote: You did actually create a sourceforge project for this joke ? Costin Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Hi All, I'm pleased to finally propose the SuperXMailer for Jakarta via the incubator. I'd like for the Jakarta PMC/committers to vote a tacit approval of the project before we work on acceptance into the incubator. I'm sure that despite the inevitable controversy, folks will see a true value in this project and its active community. Unfortunately the source repository and mail archives are down at the moment, but I'm sure they'll be restored soon. Note that there is also something strange with the bug database. We now have email deobfuscation which defeats schemes like [EMAIL PROTECTED] and such, as well as acoliver at apache dot org. No worries, the mail will be harvested and get through! Thanks for your consideration. Please feel free to submit your vote in advance. -Andy http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?SuperXMailerProposal [0] rationale SuperXMailer, the project hosted at http://sourceforge.net/projects/superxmailer/ is a tool for harvesting email addresses from web pages and mail lists, storing them in any database or XML file, and sending them email addresses. It features opt-out lists, email verification and much more. The project is the creation of a number of Apache committers and is run as a meritocratic community-developed project. Presently the CVS repository and mail lists are down (as of 3/30), but we have opened up a support request and will have it up again soon. [0.1] criteria Meritocracy: SuperXMailer follows the Apache meritocracy rules, with a core of committers including ASF members. Community: SuperXMailer has a modest, but very active community. Its users are very pleased with its performance and capture capabillities. Core Developers. SuperXMailer has an active and dedicated team of committers. The project was founded by Andrew C. Oliver, who is extremely dedicated to SuperXMailer and authored the majority of the codebase. Nicola Ken Barrozzi and Glen Stampoultzis are frequent contributors of components and bug fixes as well as some significant extensions. Sam Ruby has offered to provide Web Services extensions via Axis. Alignment: SuperXMailer makes use of Lucene, POI, Struts, Velocity, Turbine, Xerces, Tomcat and Xalan. Scope: SuperXMailer is entirely a server-side application, well aligned with the overall goals of the Jakarta project. [1] scope of subproject The project shall create and maintain packages written in the Java programming language constituting the framework, management tools, search/database and mailer, a standard library of additional components, documentation, a web site and additional examples. [2] identify the initial source from which the project is to be populated The project currently resides on the SourceForge (http://tapestry.sf.net). [3] identify the Jakarta resources to be created [3.1] mailing lists(s) superx-user superx-dev [3.2] CVS repositories jakarta-superx [3.3] Bugzilla framework - superx components - web site, contrib library, documentation, examples [3.4] Wiki The SuperXMailer developers would like to make use of the ApacheWiki in order to facillitate the admittedly spartan documentation. However, its extremely easy to use. Many Apache committers have received mail from persons using it with great results. [4] identify the initial set of committers (Any Jakarta commmitter is welcome to add their name here) Andrew C. Oliver Nicola Ken Barrozzi Glen Stampoultzis [5] identify apache sponsoring individuals (Any Apache member is welcome to add their name here) Andrew C. Oliver Nicola Ken Barrozzi - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Proposal] SuperXMailer
On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 09:32 AM, Tom Copeland wrote: I hereby appoint myself Chief Architect. As my first act, I have completed our High Level Architecture. Here it is: --- - SuperXMailer - - - Other stuff - --- Buffoon! I think you really dropped the ball. There's an obvious refactoring : --- - SuperXMailer - = - Other stuff - --- geir P.S. Watch out, I'm after your job -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun and the JCP 2.5
On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 05:38 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Yes, Apache is on the scholarship board. If you want to discuss this further, you might consider joining the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. The problem is that I might inadvertantly receive information covered by apache's non-disclosure agreements with Sun. This could limit my economic viability in the future should I wish to implement a technology which competes with Sun. Would it be possible to have a list set up for those who are either not members or whom do not wish to be bound by such agreements to discuss the Apache side of the JCP? I've suggested this time and again, making a jcp-discussion list where no NDA-covered information would be submitted, but there never is any interest. If you are interested now - Sam, could you do the honors? geir -Andy - Sam Ruby - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun and the JCP 2.5
On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 07:06 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Andrew C. Oliver wrote: We've been through this before. The list is has no Sun employees on it. It has only Apache members. They make decisions on behalf of the ASF. You can choose to no longer be a member of the ASF. You can choose not to participate. At the moment, you have chosen the former and not the latter. Sigh. I have not signed any NDA. I have only signed the ASF membership application. We can take a list which gets virtually zero traffic and split it in two. We did that once before, and created a list which allows Sun to participate. It gets even less traffic. How you can prove a negative (i.e., that you had access to such information but never actually took advantage of it), is beyond me. What should we call this proposed list? jcp-open? jabberwocky? soundofsilence? -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Commons EL 1.0 Released
On Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 06:58 AM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: Someone cares to explain the difference between JEXL and this one? Jexl is my own concoction to do what the JSTL EL does with extensions, w/o worry about some of the limitations of the EL (such as access to methods...) Jelly uses Jexl, and Maven use Jelly, so there is some use :) geir Pier Jan Luehe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Commons EL team is pleased to announce the first official release of Commons EL from the Apache Software Foundation. Commons EL provides an interpreter for the Expression Language that is part of the JavaServer Pages (JSP) specification, version 2.0. For more details, see the Release Notes at http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/commons/el/RELEASE-NOTES.txt The binary distribution is available at http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi, and the source distribution at http://jakarta.apache.org/site/sourceindex.cgi Please remember to verify the signatures of the distribution bundles using the keys found at http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/commons/el/KEYS For more information on Commons EL, go to http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/el.html Jan Luehe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Commons EL 1.0 Released
On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 06:02 PM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: On 25/6/03 2:49 Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 06:58 AM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: Someone cares to explain the difference between JEXL and this one? Jexl is my own concoction to do what the JSTL EL does with extensions, w/o worry about some of the limitations of the EL (such as access to methods...) Ah! :-) Because I always used the JSP spec to guide me in the use of JEXL expressions.. Jexl was originally written to support as far as it could the JSTL spec. That's still the intention - however, there are useful things from other places (like Velocity) where extending the spec was important to me and to users, such as arbitrary method calls foo.bar( woogie.thingy() ) I'm not sure where the JSP spec is on this at this point. Jelly uses Jexl, and Maven use Jelly, so there is some use :) I'm just digging around for expression languages, and was wondering about the differences (as they do look way similar)... Anyhow, I just opted to use JXPATH :-) :) geir Pier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Read brian's article on salon...
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/07/08/ outsourcing_save_the_world/index.html -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mail2.html - mail.html
On Sunday, July 20, 2003, at 06:19 AM, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: Hi all, I am wondering how it might be if deleting jakarta.apache.org/site/mail2.html and putting all the contents to jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html All the Apache TLPs (Top Level Projects) do not separate the mail list explanation pages like jakarta, AFAICS. cf. http://ant.apache.org/mail.html http://httpd.apache.org/lists.html I think that each subprojects can indicate the direct/appropriate subscribe/unscribe section from each subprojects' pages. (Now: e.g. http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail2.html#tomcat future: e.g. http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html#tomcat) Any thoughts? I think the motivation is to force people to read the first page before they get to the second. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mail2.html - mail.html
On Sunday, July 20, 2003, at 11:19 AM, Danny Angus wrote: I believe the idea is to make people read the rules first, I wouldn't advise changing it unless you have a good reason to, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Yes, that's what i was trying to hint at :) +1 d. -Original Message- From: Tetsuya Kitahata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 20 July 2003 11:20 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: mail2.html - mail.html Hi all, I am wondering how it might be if deleting jakarta.apache.org/site/mail2.html and putting all the contents to jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html All the Apache TLPs (Top Level Projects) do not separate the mail list explanation pages like jakarta, AFAICS. cf. http://ant.apache.org/mail.html http://httpd.apache.org/lists.html I think that each subprojects can indicate the direct/appropriate subscribe/unscribe section from each subprojects' pages. (Now: e.g. http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail2.html#tomcat future: e.g. http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html#tomcat) Any thoughts? -- Tetsuya ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mail2.html - mail.html
The nice thing about the current approach is that you can't get to see the links w/o having to have read enough of the first page to understand that you have to click through to the next page. Otherwise, people will just skip down until they find what they want and then have missed what is some good prelim info for our community. It's not much of a burden on people, as once you've done it, you just know to skip to bottom and go to the mail for new lists... geir On Sunday, July 20, 2003, at 11:48 AM, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 11:33:20 -0400 Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe the idea is to make people read the rules first, I wouldn't advise changing it unless you have a good reason to, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Yes, that's what i was trying to hint at :) I know this and the purpose. Alternatively, e.g.-site/mail.html GUIDELINE(#guideline) (brief description) . Tomcat User List SubscribeUnsubscribe ArchiveGuideline(jump to #guideline) Dev List SubscribeUnsubscribe ArchiveGuideline .. This might be enough, I think. Sincerely, -- Tetsuya ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: velocity name conflict
On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 04:41 AM, Henri Gomez wrote: Hi to all, May be some of you knows there is a projet on Sourceforge, named velocity, which is a file manager for the GNOME 2 Desktop environment. Did someone speak with them to see if they could change their name ? I'm not sure that there's a problem with that, as there are completely different. The probably don't know about us - I'll drop them a note, but I can't see what we could or should do about it. geir Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: velocity name conflict
On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 05:35 AM, Henri Gomez wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. a écrit : On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 04:41 AM, Henri Gomez wrote: Hi to all, May be some of you knows there is a projet on Sourceforge, named velocity, which is a file manager for the GNOME 2 Desktop environment. Did someone speak with them to see if they could change their name ? I'm not sure that there's a problem with that, as there are completely different. The probably don't know about us - I'll drop them a note, but I can't see what we could or should do about it. It could be a problem for many users which are using deb or rpm packaging, since we currently have a conflict between two very differents projects. And since peoples are using apt like stuff to make their system up to date, it may brake their systems. The jpackage (www.jpackage.org) project is the jakarta velocity rpm provider for many users. I meant a legal problem. However, this is a great argument that I'll put in the note :) geir - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-956-2604(w) Adeptra, Inc. 203-434-2093(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 203-247-1713(m) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Call on Stein to resin
(and I call on Greg Stein to stay put...) On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 04:21 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Oh! resign. I thought you wanted him to use Resin rather than Tomcat. geir On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 04:05 PM, Vic Cekvenich wrote: http://theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=22337#101159 http://theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=22337#101173 I call on Greg Stein to resign. .V - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Call on Stein to resign over Gernimo
On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 05:00 PM, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
I repeat:
http://theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=22337#101159
Geir, are you supporting his actions, the ethics in here, denying what
that developer is saying, ie: that is not his code? I know my code
when I see it. What part are you supporting, all of it?
Vic - take a deep breath.
The ASF treats the allegations of code copying very seriously, and will
take what actions are necessary to ensure that no IP rights are
violated, any offending code, if found, is removed, and any other
appropriate action is taken.
However, you must allow the alleged violations to be vetted - just as
you wouldn't take the ASF's word that all was fine w/o explanation, you
shouldn't take JBoss claim of violation at face value either. Examine
the code - look for yourself. Do you really think that the Geronimo
developers would think they could steal JBoss code and get away with
it? Do you think that studly contributors to Geronimo need to steal
such visionary innovations like :
public boolean getStatus() {
return status;
}
(or whatever the class field name is...)
Many of the claims by JBoss appear to me to be specious. Deriving a
class from log4j? The example given by JBoss is a *log4j example* that
both groups used as a basis for their logger. (Hey, Ceki! Can we have
trace???) Using 'Interceptor' for the name of a class that's an
interceptor? Using IDEA-generated getters/setters for POJO fields?
It's hard to imagine that any of this stuff will stand up to rational
scrutiny.
-Stein is the one that railroaded this project on the lists, a
chairman. It is easy to trace messages that lead us to this.
He didn't railroad anything. Many people support it, and much
activity and work has gone into it.
-Durign his rule, ASF brand was embarased. What does it mean, ASF
developer now?
How?
-Using ASF funds for this is a shame and a waste.
What funds?
I woud like for my profession to be ethical, the people that steal
should not be in here amongs us, but where other people that steal
are. What if a consultant you hire steals?
He can resign and get some nice awardor, be voted out, together with
other people the think stealing is OK. ASF money/resources is better
spent putting people in Jail that do this to any other OSS project,
and making sure they can't ever work in this industry.
Like lets say in China, they get the Coca-Cola recepie, and then they
start selling Red-Cola... but it tastes the same beacuse it has the
same recepie? Is this OK? You are not going to say, well lets see what
they can legaly prove and what the lawyers say and then lets some time
pass.
Ethics!
No need to go find montivation that got us here, let's just go back to
before Geroniomo. Time in Las Vegas can be better spent. No need to
play games.
.V
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
(and I call on Greg Stein to stay put...)
.V
-
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: Call on Stein to resin
On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 09:57 AM, mohammad nabil wrote: Vic, Notwithstanding your arguments this is not the appropriate forum for this. This list is for project management discussion regarding the Jakarta project. Geronimo is not under the jursidiction of the Jakarta project. If you want to make trouble please make it in the appropriate place, where you can be sure to be acknowledged by people who know about the issues. d. ýwhy it is not the appropriate forum for this shouldnt we know the truth??!!!ý We must know the truth.ý It has nothing to do with Jakarta! This is [EMAIL PROTECTED] i wonder why you try to defend yourself if you are right and didn't make any think ý unfair !!!ý Please, go to the incubator and geronimo-dev lists. That's where all of this should be discussed, because it HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JAKARTA! JAKARTA != APACHE != GERONIMO or you feel that you feel guilty??!! why you feel so?? I WONDERý Will you rebuild the copied modules or just will rename it?ý sure if they were stolen !!! ý It turns out, JBoss might have incorrectly handled log4j code. Are you yelling at them too? The ASF, the Incubator PMC, and the Geronimo team are working to evaluate the claims and make any fixes as required. geir _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus - 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: Call on Stein to resign over Gernimo
On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 01:25 PM, Vic Cekvenich wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: I think that this is the right list, very few people are intrested about the incubator. This is about ASF reputation. (It is also about the OSS reputation, including BSD, Linux, CodeHus, etc.) Due to this Stein mistake OSS could be view as very lowest form. Makes me think ... hmm, did Linux developers refactor SCO code? Shame. I would like to know... does ASF claim that if they refactor offending code one by one, they feel they are clean? or If the code was imported and beeing refactored, that that is a probelm. Vic : I didn't write any of the above. Please try and make clear your attributions especially when what you are saying is inflammatory and in the wrong forum. The ASF treats the allegations of code copying very seriously, and will take what actions are necessary to ensure that no IP rights are violated, any offending code, if found, is removed, and any other appropriate action is taken. I have been thinking about it, I do not think removing the offeding code is appropriate or sufficient. If proven, I think offending devlopers, new or old should be baned from ASF (and other OSS projects) for a few years. The project should be parked. Let it live on SF, why shield it (becuase now ASF has to use their lawyers/resources) ASF should publicly applogize, and as a sign of friendship with OSS, do something to help jBoss, such as help with J2EE certification, or help with code or something. Did I say that Stein should be removed, as the person out of all the OSS projects out there, did most to ruin the high reputation, trough negligence or some other reason. I feel dirty using Apache Struts today becuase of this mess. I already remvoed ASF licnese from basicPortal.sf.net when this was originaly done and uses a commons license or something like that. However, you must allow the alleged violations to be vetted - just as you wouldn't take the ASF's word that all was fine w/o explanation, you shouldn't take JBoss claim of violation at face value either. http://theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=22337#101208 Above says: The version 1.1 and 1.2 do contain an interface with methods hinting to the 3 maps design Marc is talking about. This is fine proof for me. I think some sort of joint commission should be set up, of people with fine reputation, to report in a certain timeframe as to what happened. Also a sepreare group should find out what to do about it. This is a crissis as big as any, IMO. To the people that are siting on the sidelines: Do something. It does not have to be public. It is when silent majority sits on the hands, and allows immoral things to happen that the society loses. This is about sofware, not about lawyers. I will try to make this last message on the topic of ethics, its up to the people sitting on the hands to see this is as a problem and do something. .V - 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: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
What do the turbine people want? On Nov 30, 2003, at 6:08 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 30 Nov 2003, at 20:41, robert burrell donkin wrote: sorry, missed one and probably [ ] leave JCS within turbine [ ] JCS to apache commons [ ] JCS to jakarta commons [ ] JCS to jakarta top level [ ] JCS to incubator [ ] something else (please specify)... ps before i get flamed (once again), i'd better add that i think that it'd be useful to try to get some consensus about where the right place for JCS is and that's why i started this thread. whatever action to be taken (if any) will have to be decided on the pmc list. - robert - 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: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
On Nov 30, 2003, at 9:57 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: What do the turbine people want? If we presume the existance of 'turbine people', then that would be a good indication that the right thing to do would be to leave JCS within turbine, and encourage turbine to be promoted to a top level project, taking JCS with it. Why? There are Gump people, Tomcat people, struts people, taglib people, etc. There's nothing wrong with recognizing that the various citizens of Jakarta work on different things. And if Turbine wants to go to TLP, +1 from me. geir On Nov 30, 2003, at 6:08 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 30 Nov 2003, at 20:41, robert burrell donkin wrote: sorry, missed one and probably [ ] leave JCS within turbine [ ] JCS to apache commons [ ] JCS to jakarta commons [ ] JCS to jakarta top level [ ] JCS to incubator [ ] something else (please specify)... ps before i get flamed (once again), i'd better add that i think that it'd be useful to try to get some consensus about where the right place for JCS is and that's why i started this thread. whatever action to be taken (if any) will have to be decided on the pmc list. - robert - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Karma for Jakarta main web site
On Dec 5, 2003, at 3:52 AM, Oliver Zeigermann wrote: As indicated on http://jakarta.apache.org/site/jakarta-site2b.html I like to get CVS Karma to update the Jakarta main web site. Could someone grant me that Karma, please? Done. Be good. geir Thanks in advance :) Oliver - 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: [POLL] Future Of Turbine-JCS
On Dec 15, 2003, at 4:23 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 13 Dec 2003, at 22:22, Martin Poeschl wrote: what do you mean? the code works. it is used by other projects .. and basically development slowed down as the developers are waiting for the jcache spec ... so i don't think there is any problem as long as there are developers maintaining the code IMHO 1 the pmc is unable to demonstrate oversight. 2 there are a large number of pmc people who believe that umbrella sub-projects don't work. as far as i was concerned the consensus was that whatever the JCS team wanted was cool provided that it addressed 1 + 2. promotion to sub-project status satisfies 2 and having henning and other turbineers volunteer to provide oversight satisfies 1. If you solve 1, then 2 can be demonstrated. No need to do anything but ensure PMC oversight. geir -- 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
On Dec 17, 2003, at 10:19 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: The reason everything is quiet here is all decisions are being made on private lists now. | Don't feed | | the trolls | | | | --\|/ -- 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] -- 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
On Dec 17, 2003, at 11:01 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: As a slight aside, getting on the PMC list just means nudging an existing member and pointing out that you are an active committer to Jakarta. Yep. Do that. Every committer should want to be part of the PMC. geir -- 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
On Dec 18, 2003, at 9:30 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: As a slight aside, getting on the PMC list just means nudging an existing member and pointing out that you are an active committer to Jakarta. Who's the best person to nudge then? :) Anyone. Interested? -- Andy Armstrong, Tagish - 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: Just in case you're curious
On Dec 18, 2003, at 9:58 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: As a slight aside, getting on the PMC list just means nudging an existing member and pointing out that you are an active committer to Jakarta. Do you feel that we'll still be an open source organization in more than name if all decisions end up being made on private PMC lists not open to the public? This is FUD. No decisions are being made in private. I think the best way to describe what is going on in private is that we are trying to get things organized enough to have a public discussion of the things that are concerning us. The ironic thing is that the upshot of what we are discussing is how to make governance of Jakarta as inclusive as possible :) geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PMC mailing list (Re: Just in case you're curious)
On Dec 18, 2003, at 9:52 AM, Joe Germuska wrote: Anyone. Interested? I'm interested in being on the PMC mailing list; I just became a Struts committer. My apache ID is germuska. Joe, I took the liberty of cc-ing the general Jakarta list. Congrats on becoming a committer. I hope that your CLA has been signed and sent to the ASF. :) What we are trying to do is expand the Jakarta PMC to give as much inclusion and oversight as possible for all jakarta projects. To that end, we are looking for committers that are interested in the oversight of the projects, not just working on the projects. Fundamentally, this means that the committers are ensuring that the code and other contributions that is being added to the project's CVS is properly contributed (via a committer w/ a CLA or on a public list where it's clear it's a freely given contribution) and properly licensed. This is a subject we'll be discussing more on the general@ list, and I urge you to pay attention, participate and decide if this is something you wish to volunteer for. geir -- 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
On Dec 18, 2003, at 11:28 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: This is FUD. No decisions are being made in private. Isn't everything you disagree with? You are making assertions that aren't correct to cast doubt on something. That's commonly known as FUD. I think the best way to describe what is going on in private is that we are trying to get things organized enough to have a public discussion of the things that are concerning us. Which is IMHO, PRECISELY why it should take place here. Why should we describe it if when we can let it describe itself? Here I disagree with you, and what you are saying isn't FUD - it's just that I disagree. See the difference? The ironic thing is that the upshot of what we are discussing is how to make governance of Jakarta as inclusive as possible :) Glad you caught that. The private list of any PMC has it's place. The specific problem we are solving has to do with governance of Jakarta and how to bring as much of the community as possible into that governance process to make things as transparent and accountable as possible. Because there is this specific problem, I think that the private list is fine venue for the PMC to organize how it is going to approach the problem, especially since it's clear that we want to bring this to general@ ASAP. Ignoring this is convenient to support a position characterizing Jakarta as not open, but ignores the facts of the matter, IMO. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC
On Dec 18, 2003, at 2:24 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: I would have embraced that idea a year ago, but when discussed it was said to not be an option to have a hierarchy of PMCs below the Jakarta PMC of 7 members. There is a difference between a hierarchy and a confederation. There is absolutely nothing that says that we cannot have: Jakarta PMC: responsible for jakarta-site/jakarta-site2 Tomcat PMC: tomcat and related code Struts PMC: struts and related code Jakarta Commons PMC: ... Tapestry PMC: ... ... All without a single change to the Jakarta domain. No one should feel that there is any relationship between the Foundation's legal structure, and e-mail/web addresses. We have had this confirmed already by both Greg and Sam. The above *is* an acceptable solution to the Board. The question is whether or not it is an acceptable one to us. This is nothing I would encourage. There's really no question that it's legal. But it does then make Jakarta a website, rather than a community, IMO. I'd rather see the community. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC
On Dec 18, 2003, at 2:35 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: I would have embraced that idea a year ago, but when discussed it was said to not be an option to have a hierarchy of PMCs below the Jakarta PMC of 7 members. There is a difference between a hierarchy and a confederation. There is absolutely nothing that says that we cannot have: Jakarta PMC: responsible for jakarta-site/jakarta-site2 Tomcat PMC: tomcat and related code Struts PMC: struts and related code Jakarta Commons PMC: ... Tapestry PMC: ... ... All without a single change to the Jakarta domain. No one should feel that there is any relationship between the Foundation's legal structure, and e-mail/web addresses. We have had this confirmed already by both Greg and Sam. The above *is* an acceptable solution to the Board. The question is whether or not it is an acceptable one to us. Gotya. Had been wondering why you kept pushing the multi-PMC approach. Clue me in because I don't get it. I'm +0 to this and would still be worried about what 'Jakarta' meant now. Hopefully if this happened, ant, maven, avalon, cocoon, etc would be able to join Jakarta again. Same for xerces-J, xalan-J etc. I'm -1 to this, but it's not a -1-able thing. Projects are free to apply for top level status if they want. -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volunteering for PMC membership
On Dec 18, 2003, at 3:14 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: Hi, I, Harish Krishnaswamy (harishkswamy), a Tapestry committer, would like to help grow Jakarta in whatever capacity I can and I request my nomination for PMC membership. Hey look! He's willing to swim upstream to help *grow* Jakarta. I say we take him! geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC
1) s/product/sub-project/ 2) I don't know what 'hosted at Jakarta' means. The CVS repositories are ASF respositories - there is no hierarchy grouping them as 'jakarta'. As for using the Jakarta website, the Jakarta community would be responsible for it, and thus they will decide on it's content. IOW, ASF projects that the Jakarta community has no oversight or responsibility for will be able to be a part of the Jakarta site at their pleasure. It's simply common sense. geir On Dec 18, 2003, at 5:45 PM, Ted Husted wrote: To do this, each product would simply need to draft a resolution to create the PMC and select a chair, and ask that it be placed on the board's agenda for the next meeting, just as Log4J and the others did. It would be very important that each product do this themselves, to help show they are ready for self-management. Essentially, each product would still be a TLP, but would just be hosted at Jakarta. This option has always been available, it's just that every product since Ant has chosen to have their own hostname and website. It's also important to remember that some of these products, like Log4J, are not just about Java anymore. The Apache Logging project will have compatible codebases available for half-a-dozen platforms. (Now *that's* community building!) -Ted. Dirk Verbeeck wrote: +1 If this is acceptable by the board then it's the ideal solution. No changes to the email/website structure, jakarta remains the center of the apache java development with a shared announcement list, general list, news and download pages, ... The only change is that the board gets a list of members overseeing each project (=PMC) and additionally a Jakarta Community project building a java community at Apache. (assisting the java projects) The board will not get one big report from jakarta but many small ones and can see witch (sub)projects needs more members. Of course many members will be joining multiple PMCs. Is this possible? -- Dirk Noel J. Bergman wrote: There is a difference between a hierarchy and a confederation. There is absolutely nothing that says that we cannot have: Jakarta PMC: responsible for jakarta-site/jakarta-site2 Tomcat PMC: tomcat and related code Struts PMC: struts and related code Jakarta Commons PMC: ... Tapestry PMC: ... ... All without a single change to the Jakarta domain. No one should feel that there is any relationship between the Foundation's legal structure, and e-mail/web addresses. We have had this confirmed already by both Greg and Sam. The above *is* an acceptable solution to the Board. The question is whether or not it is an acceptable one to us. --- Noel - 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] -- 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
On Dec 18, 2003, at 8:02 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: This is FUD. No decisions are being made in private. Isn't everything you disagree with? You are making assertions that aren't correct to cast doubt on something. That's commonly known as FUD. I'm sorry, I hallucinated that we were having all of these discussions about the future of jakarta and how to best reorganize it on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remember what you said. You said that decisions were being made in private. Which is IMHO, PRECISELY why it should take place here. Why should we describe it if when we can let it describe itself? Here I disagree with you, and what you are saying isn't FUD - it's just that I disagree. See the difference? I'm not sure you do. But do you see the difference, right? One is a disagreement, and one is you making things up. The ironic thing is that the upshot of what we are discussing is how to make governance of Jakarta as inclusive as possible :) Glad you caught that. The private list of any PMC has it's place. The specific problem we are solving has to do with governance of Jakarta and how to bring as much of the community as possible into that governance process to make things as transparent and accountable as possible. Because there is this specific problem, I think that the private list is fine venue for the PMC to organize how it is going to approach the problem, especially since it's clear that we want to bring this to general@ ASAP. Ironic. Ignoring this is convenient to support a position characterizing Jakarta as not open, but ignores the facts of the matter, IMO. Yeah right. I favor all of the present discussion on PMC@ take place here. No more secret discussions except when they MUST be secret... Openness isn't always convenient. And thinking things through isn't either. But sometimes it must be done. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC
On Dec 18, 2003, at 5:27 PM, Dirk Verbeeck wrote: +1 If this is acceptable by the board then it's the ideal solution. No changes to the email/website structure, jakarta remains the center of the apache java development with a shared announcement list, general list, news and download pages, ... The only change is that the board gets a list of members overseeing each project (=PMC) and additionally a Jakarta Community project building a java community at Apache. (assisting the java projects) The board will not get one big report from jakarta but many small ones and can see witch (sub)projects needs more members. Yes, the board gets 1 report from each little project. Jakarta is thus broken up. It think this is a bad idea. We have other problems to solve first. Lets solve them and take care of our responsibility for oversight. Then you can break up Jakarta for whatever reason you think makes that sensible. At least then I don't feel like we punted on the oversight issue. geir Of course many members will be joining multiple PMCs. Is this possible? -- Dirk Noel J. Bergman wrote: There is a difference between a hierarchy and a confederation. There is absolutely nothing that says that we cannot have: Jakarta PMC: responsible for jakarta-site/jakarta-site2 Tomcat PMC: tomcat and related code Struts PMC: struts and related code Jakarta Commons PMC: ... Tapestry PMC: ... ... All without a single change to the Jakarta domain. No one should feel that there is any relationship between the Foundation's legal structure, and e-mail/web addresses. We have had this confirmed already by both Greg and Sam. The above *is* an acceptable solution to the Board. The question is whether or not it is an acceptable one to us. --- 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: Just in case you're curious
On Dec 18, 2003, at 5:39 PM, Dirk Verbeeck wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Dec 18, 2003, at 9:30 AM, Andy Armstrong wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: As a slight aside, getting on the PMC list just means nudging an existing member and pointing out that you are an active committer to Jakarta. Who's the best person to nudge then? :) Anyone. Interested? Looks like there is some important stuff going on so maybe I should join as well. Either you believe that everyone should join (as I do), or that no one should join (as the break up Jakarta crowd would implicitly have it) other than to run a website. You get a big welcome from me if the former, and a good luck, do good work from me if the latter. geir -- Dirk - 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: Why you *want* to be on the PMC
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?
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
On Dec 19, 2003, at 12:56 AM, Rainer Klute wrote: 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. That's the point of getting as many people as are seriously interested in the subject on the PMC. Then all can participate, and if we discuss something sensitive (as defined by the discusser), it doesn't all have to be on Google. geir -- 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?
On Dec 19, 2003, at 2:27 PM, Ted Husted wrote: 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. I think this is mostly right, and I say mostly because it's legally precise, but in practice, the community tends to be there first, rather than be convened later, and the community also tends to suggest to the board the individual they wish to 'oversee' (meaning the PMC chair). The board doesn't always accept the community's recommendation, though, and indeed the selection of chair is legally the board's sole assignment, as you way. Since the committee is formed by a resolution of the board, its members are eligible for legal protection in the event of a lawsuit. I don't believe this is correct, although it will require someone else to give a definitive answer. (I've been playing a bit in the legal sandbox re some ASF-related issues, so I've been paying attention to this...) Indemnification is granted for directors, officers and members of the corporation (the ASF), or serving at the request of the corporation in some way. Thus, the PMC chair, as an officer of the corporation is protected, but not all PMC members. However, the structure of the ASF is such that the ASF is the holder of copyright and owner of the code, which provides a level of protection for committers. 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.) 100% correct [SNIP] 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. I believe that this isn't right - the ASF does own the codebase via the copyright, and the codebase is licensed at no cost to any entity that is willing to agree to the terms of the license. That entity, community or otherwise, cannot remove that license or change it unilaterally. I think that my understanding of these issues has been clarifying over the last several months due to my JCP work. This stuff always is hard for us non-lawyers. To that end, as I am not a lawyer, all that I said above could be completely wrong :) geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PMC membership : I fear additional responsibility
I want to share a conversation that I hope sheds some light on what it means to be on the PMC. I was talking to a friend yesterday who said I fear additional responsibility. I told him that he should have nothing to fear, as what's being asked for is that the committers simply continue to pay attention. His response was paying attention is a _big_ responsibility That's true, I thought. So I told him but if you are interested in the project you are going to do that anyway. IOW, most committers are paying attention to what's coming in jakarta is just so big though Aha! Being on the PMC doesn't mean you have to watch *every* commit in *every* project. The requirement of the PMC is that it, as a committee delegated oversight authority by the board, is responsible as a *group* for that oversight. If we can organize ourselves so that there is coverage that to an outside observer would be deemed reasonable and effective, then we satisfy the needs of the ASF. (The board could void this interpretation, but so far has indicated that it wouldn't). So this person, who participates in foo and some components of Jakarta Commons, would just continue to do what he normally does - participate as he does already. The only difference is that we would do our job and ensure that he understands the rules about contributions, CLAs, and what code contributions require the Incubator for IP accountability. ( Incubator = Largish contributions from outside of the ASF. Largish is loosely defined : Small patch- and file-sized commits and contributions don't need Incubator, an entire database project from Oracle does. The line is somewhere in the middle :) Anyway, I hope this example helps. It certainly gave me insight into what this individual was struggling with, and I assume that he isn't the only one... geir -- 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?
On Dec 20, 2003, at 8:24 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote: Log4j is not leaving. It is simply moving to a new room in the house, a room with a different label but still located within the same house. As any house, this house offers protection and comfort to its inhabitants. It is a place where developers can unleash their creative powers onto the world. But this house is unique in its degree of openness and tolerance. Apache is a great place to be regardless of the room you chose. Well, you moved out of the Jakarta suite to another part of the Apache house :) As for log4j, its developers will continue to be involved with Jakarta. Many of us use Jakarta products in our daily work. Moreover, without the software contained in Jakarta, there wouldn't be much use for log4j. So there are no goodbyes to be said, we are just next door. No need to put on shoes, you can hang on to your slippers. Our door is open, you don't have to knock when you come in. public_pestering type=obligatory Can we have TRACE as a supported level? /public_pestering At 07:23 AM 12/20/2003 -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Dec 19, 2003, at 3:33 PM, Costin Manolache wrote: Ted Husted : [SNIP] I agreed w/ every word from Costin. 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. Agreed. JC is a vibrant sub-project with ties to may Jakarta sub-projects. I think that important and valuable. I think log4j will do fine, and they can always come back. It's not clear what kind of synergy the log4* projects will bring together, but will be interesting to watch. I had such mixed emotions about log4j leaving, as I think it's going to take a bit of our community away. On the other hand, I support the freedom of the log4j community to choose it's own path, and that wins out with me. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ceki Gülcü For log4j documentation consider The complete log4j manual ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/products/clm_t.jsp - 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?
On Dec 20, 2003, at 11:36 AM, Santiago Gala wrote: El sábado, 20 dici, 2003, a las 14:00 Europe/Madrid, Geir Magnusson Jr. escribió: On Dec 19, 2003, at 2:27 PM, Ted Husted wrote: (...) 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. I believe that this isn't right - the ASF does own the codebase via the copyright, and the codebase is licensed at no cost to any entity that is willing to agree to the terms of the license. That entity, community or otherwise, cannot remove that license or change it unilaterally. I think the point Ted makes, summarized as: The ASF just owns the brand and yesterday's copyright. is, actually, subtle: Because of the Apache License, anybody wishing so can carry the code and keep the development outside of the ASF, with their own rules and licenses. This has only the brand and attribution restriction, as per our license. Well, it's not terribly deep, IMO. They can fork and carry the code, but the code that is created has their own rules and license. The ASF code still has the ASF license and thus the rules in that license. I agree that the beauty of OSS is that anyone can continue w/ a project in their own way as they choose, but I just don't think it's that deep or subtle. That freedom is one of the reasons we all are here. So, even if nominally, as you say, the code is the ASF property, anybody can re-license under different terms, provided that the ASF license conditions, the brand, essentially, are met. Not at all. You can't relicense the code. The Apache Software License remains w/ the code. *new* code can have different terms, but not ASF-licensed code. In the hypothetical event that the ASF would close our License (which, BTW, would be against the ASF charter), the commmunity could just stop contributing the same day (hence the yesterday's copyright), and keep the development elsewhere, with just a notice, a copy of the Apache License and a disclaimer (hence the brand). They can't close the license retroactively - that's one of the great things about the license. There is no risk that in the future, the code you have now will become unavailable due to some kind of license change. *Future versions* released under a *different license* may be, but that is totally different. Using a version now doesn't require to use a version in the future. This implies that those having easier ability or will to maintain the product are the effective owners of it. as in a rapidly changing environment, software rot takes care of static code bases. However, you have to recognize that sometimes software is done. Look at ORO and Regexp. Do we use them because they are rapidly innovating, or because they do what they say they are going to do, and do it well? geir -- 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
On Dec 21, 2003, at 5:03 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: You go discus your private matters wherever you like, I'd like to talk about open source projects and am quite willing to do so in the open. And you know there's a difference. :) What that we've discussed so far has been SSSooo sensitive? The recipe to the secret Jakarta Eggnog? I thought Jon took that with him... I think it is: Lots of expensive Bze Cheap store-bought eggnog There... Impeach me. I've divulged the state secrets. -Andy That's the point of getting as many people as are seriously interested in the subject on the PMC. Then all can participate, and if we discuss something sensitive (as defined by the discusser), it doesn't all have to be on Google. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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] -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sign those CLAs!
Members of the Jakarta Community : With the privilege of committership in the ASF comes the requirement that each committer sign a document called the Committer License Agreement, or CLA. The CLA is a legal agreement between you, the committer, and the ASF in which you state that the contributions that you make to the ASF in form of code, documentation, etc is your work that you are free to contribute, and that you are granting an unfettered copyright license to the ASF for that work. The purpose is to allow the ASF to be sure that the code that it offers to the world is, to the best of it's knowledge, free of questions about source and ownership. To that end, it is required that every committer in Jakarta has a signed CLA on file with the ASF. In the past, we have been negligent in ensuring this document was completed and filed, and wish to immediately rectify the situation for the ASF. This is a simple procedure, generally requiring just a few minutes of your time to fill out and mail or fax to the ASF administrative office. It will be greatly appreciated if this could be taken care of immediately. To check to see if you have a CLA on file, look here : http://www.apache.org/~jim/committers.html or http://www.apache.org/~jim/projects.html and find your name on either. If it is in italics, it means the CLA has been received and is on file. If not, please get one in. If you don't have a CLA on file, the CLA form can be found here : http://www.apache.org/licenses/cla.txt and a PDF version can be found here : http://www.apache.org/licenses/cla.pdf We will be sending out gentle reminders during the upcoming week or so for those that don't have a CLA on file, so the sooner the better as there will be less follow-up work for other Jakarta community members to do - after all, this is your responsibility and we're all volunteers. If there are any questions or problems, please bring them to this list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). If you have private concerns, because of employment or otherwise, feel free to post to the Official Jakarta State Sekrets List ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), send a private message to one or more of the knowledgeable people here on general@, post to the board list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - fair warning - readership is bigger than just the board - or to one of the board members or officers directly. This is an important subject, and people will give help if asked. Thanks for looking into this serious matter. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Just in case you're curious
On Dec 22, 2003, at 7:27 AM, Vic Cekvenich wrote: BIG SNIP Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: ... sensitive things should be on the PMC list, and non-sensitive things should be on the general@ list. /end Geir What could be something that is sensteive in an open source community? This is new direction. Gray areas should be well exposed. If you are ashamed of it, don't do open source community. There are lots of things. Committer votes, for example, are considered a sensitive issue. Inter-personal disputes. If you would have been fair with your attribution, you would have included what I then said next, namely that I felt it sensitive because of the confusion that it sews. My hope was for us to get our act together before we approached the rest of the community, and do it as a group. IOW, simply to get a handle on how we approach the community to make things clear and non-confusing. For a developer ... lets have some code in open, and the bad code we will just have in a encrypted jar. Is this open source? What do I mean by that: ASF used(?) to be Libreterian: If you want code to do something, commit the code to do it. ASF used(?) to be run by commiters. Now some are trying to develop rulling class, that is carving out roles for itself and rules to legislate iteligence and integrity for commiters, but does not committ itself?. What happend to emritius commiters? People who did not CVS a chunk of code in a while lose vote rights and their berucrat office. The people that are vocal on berucracy are same people I wonder where have they CVSed latelly. Vic, if you've been paying ANY attention, you'd know that what we are trying to do is just the opposite - get *every* committer in Jakarta onto the PMC, *eliminating* this needless boundary. Please re-read. geir -- 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
On Dec 22, 2003, at 8:05 AM, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:38:54 -0500 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: What could be something that is sensteive in an open source community? This is new direction. Gray areas should be well exposed. If you are ashamed of it, don't do open source community. There are lots of things. Committer votes, for example, are considered a sensitive issue. Inter-personal disputes. I agree. Also, I think [PROPOSAL] As it ever were mail was very reasonable. However, just one question came to my mind. Have The Committer Votes (I mean, [VOTE] in to elect new committer) to be taken place at Jakarta PMC list? ... This is very sensitive issue (maybe causes inter-personal dispute), i guess. Could you please explain more? Committer votes haven't taken place on the Jakarta PMC list. PMC member votes have, but that's a different thing. Here in Jakarta (as well as other projects, I assume), the sub-projects do committer votes in public. Some people outside of Jakarta feel that this is improper, and should be done in private to ensure that open discussion can happen in a way that doesn't hurt peoples feelings. I can see both sides of this - do it in public because it's a good pat on the back for a person to see fellow community members supporting him or her, but on the other hand, it would be a shame for people to be unable to say how they feel about a proposed committer and have that POV understood by others w/o possibly hurting the feelings of the person being voted on. I hope this is something we take up when we have this PMC issue sorted out. geir Thanks in advance. -- Tetsuya. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) P.S. Vic, if you've been paying ANY attention, you'd know that what we are trying to do is just the opposite - get *every* committer in Jakarta onto the PMC, *eliminating* this needless boundary. Well said. - 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: Just in case you're curious
I realize that arguing with you on this will have no effect, but I want to keep working to extinguish the meme you keep trying to plant. IIRC, the thread in play at the time was my note to ask the opinion of all PMC members re the CLA signing, to make sure that it was a clear message we all wanted to go out with. IRRC, you never even responded to it. Further, IIRC, there was broad consensus that things should be public (I think it was Peter's first nudge), and we were working that direction. geir On Dec 21, 2003, at 11:04 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Well, saying please and asking nicely had no effect. -- 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: Martin van den Bemt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: mvdb.com Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 22 Dec 2003 01:53:20 +0100 To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just in case you're curious Sorry to hear you didn't understand my mail at all If that is the way a PMC member communicates, I can never be part of that PMC. Mvgr, Martin On Sun, 2003-12-21 at 23:10, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Now the conversation is here, that is the solution. You're welcome. -Andy - 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] -- 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
You are free to do what you want. Is this then about personal google hitcount? On Dec 21, 2003, at 11:06 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: I think the problem isn't the private list, on which we will continue to do work, such as voting, but follow up. geir Heads up, FYI, except where I feel the situation absolutely mandates it, I will be voting/discussing here. While I'm not sure I agree, out of courtesy, I will vote privately for: * PMC nominations/discussion * legally precarious issues * things too likely to cause me to get slashdotted. I favor openness, but the peanut gallery isn't helpful. Pointedly, I will not discuss the organization, structure, software, etc. of Jakarta on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I will discuss it here. This is my personal choice. I choose to work in the open. I choose to be googled. I volunteered for it in fact. -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: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 07:35:45 -0500 To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just in case you're curious On Dec 21, 2003, at 3:51 AM, Santiago Gala wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 El domingo, 21 dici, 2003, a las 02:35 Europe/Madrid, Henri Yandell escribió: On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Santiago Gala wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 El jueves, 18 dici, 2003, a las 15:52 Europe/Madrid, Henri Yandell escribió: http://jakarta.apache.org/site/whoweare.html lists the PMC members up until the previous addition of 20 or so. That list has to go to the board etc and I plan to add them to the list as soon as I see them appear on the board's list [in the committers/ cvs module]. I have just discovered I'm listed as PMC member in the web page. When was I appointed? is there no notification to elected people? Ack. Sorry. Completely my mistake. I added you along with three others, thinking you'd been part of a batch vote with them. Instead your vote was separate one. This is the kind of problems that happen with private lists. I think the problem isn't the private list, on which we will continue to do work, such as voting, but follow up. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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] -- 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
On Dec 22, 2003, at 10:31 AM, Danny Angus wrote: While closing out everyone else. Like those who are not yet committers. I certainly think that increasing the size of the PMC makes it easier for things to get discussed on the PMC list, but if people care (and you do for one) about visibility the very nature of things mean that it won't happen for long before someone starts to get obstreperous. Just to save everyone the trip to dictionary.com : ob·strep·er·ous Pronunciation Key (b-str p r- s, b-) adj. 1. Noisily and stubbornly defiant. 2. Aggressively boisterous. I know from the past that you'd favour a fully open process, but we don't have that. I don't think this should _necessarily_ be a social experiment, in open management, this isn't a political project its about software. No one wants things unnecessarily private. The less the better. The less organizational conversation the better - more tech, more community. This stuff is tiring :) geir d. -- 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: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:38:54 -0500 To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just in case you're curious On Dec 22, 2003, at 7:27 AM, Vic Cekvenich wrote: BIG SNIP Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: ... sensitive things should be on the PMC list, and non-sensitive things should be on the general@ list. /end Geir What could be something that is sensteive in an open source community? This is new direction. Gray areas should be well exposed. If you are ashamed of it, don't do open source community. There are lots of things. Committer votes, for example, are considered a sensitive issue. Inter-personal disputes. If you would have been fair with your attribution, you would have included what I then said next, namely that I felt it sensitive because of the confusion that it sews. My hope was for us to get our act together before we approached the rest of the community, and do it as a group. IOW, simply to get a handle on how we approach the community to make things clear and non-confusing. For a developer ... lets have some code in open, and the bad code we will just have in a encrypted jar. Is this open source? What do I mean by that: ASF used(?) to be Libreterian: If you want code to do something, commit the code to do it. ASF used(?) to be run by commiters. Now some are trying to develop rulling class, that is carving out roles for itself and rules to legislate iteligence and integrity for commiters, but does not committ itself?. What happend to emritius commiters? People who did not CVS a chunk of code in a while lose vote rights and their berucrat office. The people that are vocal on berucracy are same people I wonder where have they CVSed latelly. Vic, if you've been paying ANY attention, you'd know that what we are trying to do is just the opposite - get *every* committer in Jakarta onto the PMC, *eliminating* this needless boundary. Please re-read. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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] *** 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
Re: [PROPOSAL] As it ever were
I don't think that crossposting would be good keep it here On Dec 22, 2003, at 4:52 PM, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: Hello, folks. I am a moderator of three -dev lists in jakarta. What should I do next? Forwardin' this Pro-forma to each -dev lists? T.I.A. -- Tetsuya. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 21:07:26 -0500 (Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] As it ever were) Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: This is what I proposed some weeks ago. I think you would serve the community well if you also posted a summary of pros and cons that we had discussed. On Dec 21, 2003, at 6:14 PM, Ted Husted wrote: Re: Proposal to grandfather Active Committers to Jakarta subprojects as PMC Members. As it stands, most Jakarta committers have assumed that they already have the rights, privileges, and responsibilities granted PMC members. (Mainly because it was written that way in the Jakarta bylaws). When all these committers were elected, it was with the understanding they had binding votes and oversight responsibility, as stated by the original Jakarta bylaws. It could be said that we have been electing PMC members, rather than only committers, all along, without realizing it. Following our original bylaws and practices, there is no such thing as a committer without the rights and responsibilities of PMC membership. Accordingly, a stipulation of becoming (or remaining) a committer to a Jakarta subproject can said to be PMC membership, as it is described by the ASF bylaws. To complete the process we've already begun, I suggest a [VOTE] be brought on each [EMAIL PROTECTED] list to nominate the list of its active committers to the PMC. This vote will also serve as notice to committers who wish to opt-out. To bootstrap the process, the current moderator of each DEV list can be asked to bring the vote and report the result. If necessary, a new moderator can be installed by the Chair. The moderator of each dev list will also act as the PMC steward for the subproject. The list moderator is suggested since that individual is already suppose to be monitoring the list where this activity occurs. The steward will have the responsibility of immediately reporting any new committers/PMC members elected to a subproject, so that they can be affirmed by the chair and notice given the board. All PMC members (which is to say all active committers to jakarta-* CVS repositories) will be subscribed to the PMC list, which will be a required list for PMC membership, like [EMAIL PROTECTED] The PMC business for each subproject will continue to take place on its own dev list. The steward for each project will report to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list the status of his or her subproject, covering such points as: * What code releases have been made? * Legal issues: * Cross-project issues: * Any problems with committers, members, etc? * Plans and expectations for the next period? The chair can then summarize these reports for presentation to the board. Effectively, each dev list becomes a sub-committee of the PMC. (Divide and conquer.) The list moderator/steward becomes the subcommittee's secretary, with the additional responsibility of summarizing the result of our ongoing meetings. As appropriate, the steward or any PMC member can bring up oversight issues to the PMC list. Routine matters, such as releases, can be approved by the PMC members who are committers to a given subproject. So long as the usual 3+ quorum is met, there would be no reason to bring routine votes before the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. Of course, the result would be tabulated on the steward's report, which *is* published to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. -Ted. Pro-forma [VOTE] It has come to our attention that the Committers to a Jakarta subproject must also be members of the Jakarta Project Management Committee to have binding votes. To complete the legal process, the current PMC is asking each subproject to nominate it's active committers to the PMC. Since we have never supported the idea of non-voting committers at Jakarta, and only PMC members have binding votes, if a committer is unwilling to serve on the Jakarta PMC, we will be unable to continue to extend write access to any jakarta-* CVS to that individual. Each PMC member will also be subscribed to the Jakarta PMC list. *However, all subproject business can continue to occur on this DEV list as always!* In the future, we anticipate that the PMC list will be very low-volume. (Really, we do!) The only change is that the owner of the DEV list must also serve as the PMC steward for the subproject. The steward must submit monthly status reports for the project and immediately report any new Committers to the PMC list. But, other than that, it will be business as usual. Accordingly, we ask that the Committers to this subproject nominate the following individuals to the Jakarta PMC. Please check all that apply. [ ] $committer Any committer who wishes to opt-out may notify the Jakarta chair
Re: Just in case you're curious
On Dec 22, 2003, at 6:23 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote: Larry, I'm surprised that no one answered this (at least that I saw). From what I understand, ASF believes that those on PMC have liability protection from the ASF because the PMC members are acting on behalf of the organization. Further is it seems that the ASF does not believe this protection extends to those not in the PMC (this is my personal logical conclusion based on statements around why someone would like to join a PMC). This protection is usually referenced when people talk about IP, and I'm not sure if it extends to other areas. I'm not aware of an official statement on this, but it would be nice to have one. I did respond. As I understand it, here is no protection for PMC members except for the chair, if he or she was acting on behalf of the corporation in good faith. And if you don't know Larry, he's a well-known attorney specializing in OSS matters. geir Happy Holidays -dain /* * Dain Sundstrom * Partner * Core Developers Network */ On Dec 21, 2003, at 9:08 PM, Lawrence E. Rosen wrote: No, that is not correct. The point of having most committers on the PMC is not to keep discussions out of google. The point of getting them on the PMC is so that the ASF can legally protect them, and so that they are legally empowered to participate in the decisions that govern the project. Would someone please explain what protection committers expect from ASF? And what legal empowerment is being granted? /Larry Rosen - 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] -- 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
On Dec 22, 2003, at 7:07 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote: On Dec 22, 2003, at 5:58 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Dec 22, 2003, at 6:23 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote: Larry, I'm surprised that no one answered this (at least that I saw). From what I understand, ASF believes that those on PMC have liability protection from the ASF because the PMC members are acting on behalf of the organization. Further is it seems that the ASF does not believe this protection extends to those not in the PMC (this is my personal logical conclusion based on statements around why someone would like to join a PMC). This protection is usually referenced when people talk about IP, and I'm not sure if it extends to other areas. I'm not aware of an official statement on this, but it would be nice to have one. I did respond. As I understand it, here is no protection for PMC members except for the chair, if he or she was acting on behalf of the corporation in good faith. Sorry missed your reply. From what I have seen there are vastly differing opinions on this matter (from ranking people in ASF). Anyway, it would be nice to see something official on this matter, but it is a legal matter and therefore unlikely to happen (at least anytime soon ;) Feel free to send them to me. I'm interested. I'll be happy to report back a summary or correction. And if you don't know Larry, he's a well-known attorney specializing in OSS matters. I know Larry. He used to a company I used to do business with. Ah Sorry. :) geir -dain - 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]
Indemnification of the PMC
Here is the clearest description I've found. It's by Roy Fielding, ex chair and board member of the ASF, and from all appearances, extremely knowledgeable in these matters. It was posted here : http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]msgNo=2642 Indemnification is a promise by the corporation to pay the legal expenses of an *individual* if that *individual* becomes subject to criminal or civil proceedings as a result of their actions under a role identified by the corporation, as long as such person acted in good faith and in a manner that such person reasonably believed to be in, or not be opposed to, the best interests of the corporation. In other words, a member is only indemnified for their actions as a member (not much). A director or officer is only indemnified for their actions as a director or within the scope of their mandate as an officer. A PMC member is indemnified under the category of who is or was serving at the request of the corporation as an officer or director of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise and only to the extent of that enterprise (the project). A committer who is not a PMC member is not authorized by the corporation to make decisions, and hence cannot act on behalf of the corporation, and thus is not indemnified by the corporation for those actions regardless of their status as a member, director, or officer. Likewise, we should all realize and understand that the ASF's ability to indemnify an individual is strictly limited to the assets held by the ASF. Beyond that, we are on our own as far as personal liability. It is a far better defense that an outside entity cannot successfully sue an individual for damages due to a decision made by a PMC, so it is in everyone's best interests that all of the people voting on an issue be officially named as members of the PMC (or whatever entity is so defined by the bylaws). So in summary, a PMC member is indemnified for activities done on behalf of the corporation. I think that this would be limited to the official activities of the PMC - things done on behalf of the board for the ASF, such as oversight and releases - and not general day-to-day committer activities, such as technical discussion and personal code commits. Of course, that will probably need to be clarified too. However, the key thing to remember is that the indemnification is only up to the limit of the ASFs resources, which isn't much. So try to keep the litigation to a minimum :) geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Indemnification of the PMC
Oh, and thanks to Noel for the links... On Dec 23, 2003, at 6:49 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Here is the clearest description I've found. It's by Roy Fielding, ex chair and board member of the ASF, and from all appearances, extremely knowledgeable in these matters. It was posted here : http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]msgNo=2642 Indemnification is a promise by the corporation to pay the legal expenses of an *individual* if that *individual* becomes subject to criminal or civil proceedings as a result of their actions under a role identified by the corporation, as long as such person acted in good faith and in a manner that such person reasonably believed to be in, or not be opposed to, the best interests of the corporation. In other words, a member is only indemnified for their actions as a member (not much). A director or officer is only indemnified for their actions as a director or within the scope of their mandate as an officer. A PMC member is indemnified under the category of who is or was serving at the request of the corporation as an officer or director of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise and only to the extent of that enterprise (the project). A committer who is not a PMC member is not authorized by the corporation to make decisions, and hence cannot act on behalf of the corporation, and thus is not indemnified by the corporation for those actions regardless of their status as a member, director, or officer. Likewise, we should all realize and understand that the ASF's ability to indemnify an individual is strictly limited to the assets held by the ASF. Beyond that, we are on our own as far as personal liability. It is a far better defense that an outside entity cannot successfully sue an individual for damages due to a decision made by a PMC, so it is in everyone's best interests that all of the people voting on an issue be officially named as members of the PMC (or whatever entity is so defined by the bylaws). So in summary, a PMC member is indemnified for activities done on behalf of the corporation. I think that this would be limited to the official activities of the PMC - things done on behalf of the board for the ASF, such as oversight and releases - and not general day-to-day committer activities, such as technical discussion and personal code commits. Of course, that will probably need to be clarified too. However, the key thing to remember is that the indemnification is only up to the limit of the ASFs resources, which isn't much. So try to keep the litigation to a minimum :) geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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: [VOTE] ORO 2.0.8 maintenance release
+1
On Dec 23, 2003, at 8:39 PM, Daniel F. Savarese wrote:
I know now may not be the best time to have a vote, but I would ask
the PMC to vote on approving the release of jakarta-oro 2.0.8.
The current code base contains important bug fixes and has gone too
long without a public release.
[ ] +1 I approve the release of jakarta-oro version 2.0.8.
[ ] -1 I do not approve the release of jakarta-oro version 2.0.8.
This vote will last until the end of Saturday 27th, 2003 (72 hours
minus the Christmas holiday). In accordance with
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html, at least three binding
+1 votes are required for this vote to pass and the number of +1 votes
must exceed the number of -1 votes. Non-PMC members are encouraged
to cast their non-binding votes (please indicate your vote is
non-binding to facilitate vote tabulation).
RELEASE INFORMATION:
The 2.0.8 release will be a maintenance release incorporating the
following
changes since the 2.0.7 release made in January (taken from
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/~checkout~/jakarta-oro/CHANGES?content-
type=text/plain):
o examples moved to an examples package and com.oroinc migration tool
moved to tools package.
o Fixed bug whereby compiling an expression with
Perl5Compiler.MULTILINE_MASK wasn't always having the proper effect
with respect to the matching of $ even though
Perl5Matcher.setMultiline(true) exhibited the proper behavior. For
example, the following input
aaa bbb \n ccc ddd \n eee fff
should produce bbb , ddd , and fff as matches for both the
patterns \S+\s*$ and \S+ *$ when compiled with MULTILINE_MASK.
Perl5Matcher was only producing the correct matches for the second
pattern, producing only fff as a match for the first pattern
unless setMultiline(true) had been called. This has now been fixed.
o Fixed embarrassing bug whereby an expression like (A)(B)((C)(D))+
when matched against input like ABCDE would produce matching groups
of: A B null D instead of A B CD C D.
These changes have been available to the public in the CVS repository
for testing since May 2003. There are no outstanding/unresolved issue
reports for the code.
Daniel Savarese (dfs.apache.org) will serve as the release manager for
this release. A release announcement will be sent to
{oro-dev,oro-user,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
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]
