Re: [VOTE] Move POI to TLP

2007-05-04 Thread Avik Sengupta
+1

On Friday 04 May 2007 2:47:44 pm Nick Burch wrote:
 Hi All

 After lots of discussion within POI, and Jakarta in general, we think POI
 is ready to graduate to its own TLP. Thanks to the magic of ApacheCon,
 lots of people have been on-hand to help finalise the proposal for this,
 which is attached below.

 So, now is the time to vote on the proposal:
 [ ] +1 I support the proposal
 [ ] +0 I don't care
 [ ] -1  I'm opposed to the proposal because...

 Voting will close in one week.

 Cheers
 Nick

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



Re: [VOTE] Remove POI svn restrictions.

2006-12-18 Thread Avik Sengupta

Quoting Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


Hello Avik,


I'd have been happy seeing POI move to a TLP. However, some of the
comments in this thread seem to preclude that possibility either.  I
think his leaves the community between a rock and a hard place ... I
dont want us to be subsumed as a commons project


I don't think that the level at which POI resides will make any
difference. I admit that at the beginning of this thread and
after Andy's first responses I also thought hey, let's get them
promoted to TLP and we're finally rid of these discussions in
Jakarta. I've since had time to reconsider and realize that
this is not a solution. And actually I don't think that it is
even an option. POI is not running the Apache way. Promoting
it to TLP or hiding it in commons will not change anything.
If it were a TLP, you'd be having basically the same discussions
directly with the board. Do you think they'll look more kindly
on failure to follow the established Apache procedures? If we
made a proposal to promote POI now, I would expect the board
to reject it and tell us make POI work in Jakarta before you
promote it to TLP.

A release can go wrong all right. That this wasn't detected by
the POI community itself is reason for worry. But the kind of
things that went wrong, like files being in the wrong place or
missing is even more reason for worry. The copyright statements
on the POI web site indicate that the project has been around
since 2002. Does that mean that in 4 years nobody cared to write
a build process that generates release jars conforming to
Apache standards?




This is completely out of line (to say the least). It isn't as if the  
release contained encumbered code, or didn't include source. If I were  
to use your level of rhetoric, I'd say this sounds like a witch hunt.  
Maybe you want to help out on the list, rather than presume that the  
POI developers want to become a commons subproject. How presumptuous!


Way back when the POI committers were among the first to conduct an  
audit of its dependencies. The results were on the old wiki


As to voting on files, I'm yet to see a board resolution that makes it  
mandatory. So yes, that's a suggestion that the POI team will surely  
consider (read the dev list archives, we've done that for major  
releases earlier... the current release is considered alpha for a  
reason [yes i know, its still a legal release] ), but is not reason to  
bash four years of existence on a project.


Regards
-
Avik



This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


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



Re: [VOTE] Remove POI svn restrictions.

2006-12-18 Thread Avik Sengupta
I dont care about this vote (any more). I do care deeply about POI.  
I do care about Apache and Jakarta. I resent the opposite presumption  
on less than rock-hard grounds, because it is a pretty big accusation.


The fact that the POI and remaining jakarta communties are separate is  
a FACT. Most people on this thread seems to have turned it into a  
JUDGEMENT. If that does not gel well with what the 'oversight'  
requirements, we need to find a way to work WITH the community, rather  
than attack it.


All open source project projects contributors go thru highs and lows  
of contribution. Commiters come and go, some permanently, some  
temporarily. (I recall reading a well written account of this from  
either Brian or Stefano.. cant remember... anyone have a link). At  
POI, we're lucky enough to have fresh blood coming in at regular  
intevals (as with most open source projects, usually from nowhere,  
surprising you with their commitment and great code..). Once again, we  
need to work with this phenomenon, rather than condemn the whole  
project on that basis.


The charge of insularity can go both ways. This thread is only about  
SNV access. Can I not ask how many of the indignant correspondents on  
this thread have taken the effort to come and help us get things right  
on the poi dev lists? However, that's an argument that wont get us  
anywhere, so lets not go down that path.


So in reply to every other offer of help, welcome! But I dont  
understand, why do people want to  be an officially anointed 'mentor'  
before helping out? I thought the Apache way was about  the 'doing'  
... he who does ... etc.  Please join the POI dev lists, and show us  
where we go wrong. We'd even instituted a policy to open the svn  
access to all jakarta committers for only asking.


Permit me to get personal to illustrate my point. When Henry noticed a  
few issues with the release, he wrote back saying what they were. Some  
we've pushed back, other's we've promised to fix, and in the  
meanwhile, he's offered to fix some of them himself, an offer that's  
been very gratefully accepted.


This thread, on the other hand, has degenerated into complete POI  
bashing. Once again, I'd be happy to discuss the merits of this svn  
proposal... its the subsequent bashing that completely baffles me.


Finally Martin, you say If you have anything positive to  
contribute...; dont know if you mean me personally or the project as  
a whole, I find that a wee bit offensive... sorry if I'm  
misunderstanding. POI is in active development, used by thousands , it  
doesn't need a mandate from the PMC to be successful project, does it?


I regard this mail as positive. Hope I am not wrong.

Regards.
-
Avik

Quoting Martin van den Bemt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


Hi Avik,

Avik Sengupta wrote:

Wow! The one weekend I decide not to check mail!! :)


I know what you mean :)



Am replying to the original message for convenience, but have read the
thread till this point.

Basically, the amount of negativity towards POI project in the thread
seems seems quite painful.

At the end of the day, I believe we keep saying 'Apache is about
communities'. Legal oversight is important, but if its at the cost of
destroying a community, what's the use?

I would have voted -1 on this, not because of legal reasons (which I
don't have too strong a view on any more) but because I do not
understand the need for this current intervention. 'Majority' does not
seem to be a good enough reason. Errors in build which have been
promised a fix does not seem a big enuf reason either.


I like to know your reason of the -1, despite of what has already   
been said (and despite of what is

said below here)
How can we determine what the next appropriate step is if you don't   
speak up ?




However, given the strongly negative tone of this thread, I do not wish
to debate this further. Therefore count me in as a 'don't care any more'


If you have anything positive to contribute, let me know. I can   
think of a couple : A lot of
development is being done, user list are healthy, so enough to   
invest energy in.


The simple fact is that you are currently part of Jakarta and POI   
doesn't seem to realize that or to
misuse your words don't care about that. Everything that affects   
POI actually affects Jakarta.
I've been a VP Jakarta for about 6 months now and I actually never   
had the feeling that POI was part
of that, even though I am the one who his held accountable of what   
happens at POI. With the releases
going bad, even though there is PMC representation for POI, was the   
ultimate trigger for this vote
as an initial start to improve things and after that taking the next  
 steps (I summed them up already).
So your remark about don't care anymore is not making me very happy,  
 since I hoped you would start
caring, although I hope I misinterpreted that remark and making   
assumptions that are wrong. The big
problem is that no one from POI is actually

Re: [VOTE] Remove POI svn restrictions.

2006-12-18 Thread Avik Sengupta
 eg the legal issue, which still
 remains partially unanswered.


Andy has already replied that this was done in the early days of POI's entry 
into Apache under discussion with POI's then mentor and the board. It was 
also done as a consequence of a specific issue that had arisen. 

Short of not believing him, what do you propose are the next steps to resolve 
this?

Regards
-
Avik

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



Re: [VOTE] Remove POI svn restrictions.

2006-12-17 Thread Avik Sengupta

Wow! The one weekend I decide not to check mail!! :)

Am replying to the original message for convenience, but have read the  
thread till this point.


Basically, the amount of negativity towards POI project in the thread  
seems seems quite painful.


At the end of the day, I believe we keep saying 'Apache is about  
communities'. Legal oversight is important, but if its at the cost of  
destroying a community, what's the use?


I would have voted -1 on this, not because of legal reasons (which I  
don't have too strong a view on any more) but because I do not  
understand the need for this current intervention. 'Majority' does not  
seem to be a good enough reason. Errors in build which have been  
promised a fix does not seem a big enuf reason either.


However, given the strongly negative tone of this thread, I do not  
wish to debate this further. Therefore count me in as a 'don't care  
any more'


I'd have been happy seeing POI move to a TLP. However, some of the  
comments in this thread seem to preclude that possibility either.  I  
think his leaves the community between a rock and a hard place ... I  
dont want us to be subsumed as a commons project


Regards
-
Avik


Quoting Martin van den Bemt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


Hi everyone,

You probably think Hey I have seen a similar vote started by Henri   
on 27-3-2006 and the outcome

was 3 -1 from POI so their SVN is still closed for Jakarta committers.

The reasoning behind this is that POI is still trying to stick to   
what it Jakarta once was and it is

 time they join the club completely.

[+1] Open up POI svn commit access.
[-1] Don't open POI svn commit access, because...

The vote will be open for a week.

Mvgr,
Martin

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







This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


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



Re: Board Report December

2006-12-17 Thread Avik Sengupta

It feels like they are acting as a separate entity in Jakarta and
even the ASF itself


Let me put on record my severe objection to this statement.

Regards
-
Avik

Quoting Martin van den Bemt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:



Jakarta Board Report

First of all I like to mention that I haven't be able to spent the
time I wanted to spend, which is something I will try to improve.
I like to request special attention is given to the POI subproject
section in the report.
Another improvement should be that the majority of the report should
come from the community, which I am totally failing to delegate atm.
I will start actively persuing additions to the board report by our
Jakarta committers when events occur. I don't see this as a community
problem, the failure is completely mine.

Apachecon

Austin was my first visit to apachecon and it was a great experience
to meet the people I haven't met in person yet. One of the things I
had planned was the Jakarta BOF, where I had the idea to give a
presentation and get feedback on other peoples thoughts about
Jakarta.
It gave me some more insight in projects I didn't have too
much knowledge about and the nature of the BOF turned out to be more
of free discussion and thought outlet.
On my todo list is to extract the points that were identified as
needing attention and send them to the general list for discussion.
Most important on that list is the identity of Jakarta, easy access
information of the state the projects are in and Jakarta being more
proactive of getting people aboard on the less active or non active
projects. Another idea the recently popped up is having experienced
mentors assigned to projects. With a 100+ projects this seems
like a good idea (see JCS for an example of this)

PMC :

New pmc members:

Nick Burch
Roland Weber

Change :
Dany Angus requested to be removed from the PMC. Not acted upon this
yet, since he is an ASF member, a change in the committee-info.txt
probably is sufficient.

New committers :

Jurgen Hoffmann was voted on to be able to commit to Jakarta.
He earned this because of his devotion on Turbine.
Antoine Levy-Lambert, so he can work on Slide (on his own request and
voted on by the PMC).


Releases :

- HttpComponents HttpCore 4.0-alpha3
- Commons Digester 1.8
- Commons Discovery 0.4
- Commons DbUtils 1.1
- Commons Validator 1.3.1
- Commons HttpClient 3.1-beta1
- BSF 2.4.0
- Commons Lang 2.2
- Commons Configuration 1.3

Not yet project commons-ssl:

There were announcements on the httpcomponents list (and on the
tomcat list) about a release of commons-ssl, which in real life isn't
 a commons project at all, but an external project, with the
intention of joining Jakarta. An CLA is on file and currently an
envelope is on the way to Jim, since his employer wants to have a
signed copy back. I asked Julius Davies if he could start a proposal
on the Jakarta to discuss if we could sponsor the donation. The
thread kind of died and I will restart the thread when the paperwork
is handled.
place. Julies fixed the naming of commons-ssl by calling it
Not-Yet-Commons-ssl, with giving an explenation.
Link can be found here : http://juliusdavies.ca/commons-ssl/


Projects (currently 15 main projects)

BCEL

Bcel hardly has any activity and during the BOF I learned that
Torsten Curdt adopted BCEL. With the Google summer of code Torsten
mentored 1 person working on BCEL and BCEL supports 1.5 now.
It could be worth investigating if the 2 forks of BCEL that are out
there (Findbugs and AspectJ) can be merged back to BCEL itself,
however Torsten said that both forks probably don't want to invest
there time in a merge, since the current situation works for them.
Currently BCEL is considered legacy and since projects are using it,
it is still maintained. If there are signals of people wanting to
become active, we will definitely take that opportunity.

BSF

After about 4 years of no releases, BSF finally got their release,
which was in the Apachecon press release. Since the release things
have become a bit more quiet and the user list still points to fact
that not a lot of users have picked up on the release yet, since
there were problems with the downloadscript. It will probably also
take time to get the users back that were lost in the past by not
having any releases.
Personal note : I would like to thank the BSF committers for doing
a great job.

Cactus

Cactus is currently unmaintained. There are still users, but most
questions don't get an answer. A lot of people also are wondering
if maven2 will be supported and with what j2ee versions cactus will
work. There is definitely work to do here (Cargo integration comes to
mind).

Commons

Commons has 33 proper, 11 sandbox and 16 dormant subprojects.

Currently there is a huge release boom going on at commons. After
past problems with votes not getting any attention I think things
have picked up for the better and most votes get attention. The
situation is still not perfect and still needs focus.

ECS

ECS is mature 

Re: [VOTE] Updating PMC bylaws

2004-08-10 Thread Avik Sengupta
+1

On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 21:28, Henri Yandell wrote:
 Suggested new bylaws are at:
 
 http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
 
...




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



Re: Where is Cloudscape?

2004-08-04 Thread Avik Sengupta
It'll be part of the DB project, AFAIK. And will probably take a while
to land in CVS. 

On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 12:03, Kevin A. Burton wrote:
 Hm... wanted to check this code out of CVS but can't find it :-/
 
 Maybe I'm jumping the gun a bit... I can be patient ;)
 
 http://infoworld.com/article/04/08/03/HNclouscape_1.html
 
 Kevin


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



Re: [VOTE] HiveMind as a Jakarta sub-project

2004-03-03 Thread Avik Sengupta
+1 

-
Avik 

On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 20:28, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
 All Jakarta Community Members :
 
 Howard M. Lewis Ship, on behalf of the committers of the HiveMind 
 project in the Jakarta Commons sandbox, has proposed HiveMind as a 
 Jakarta sub-project.  The proposal was sent to this list, a copy of 
 which can be found here :
 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg09244.html
 
 Please read the proposal and vote, and add any comments you deem 
 appropriate.
 
 All Jakarta community members are encouraged to vote, although only the 
 votes of the PMC members are legally binding as per the ASF*.
 
 [ ] +1  I support this proposal
 [ ] -1  I don't support this proposal
 [ ]  0  I abstain from voting for or against this proposal
 
 Comments :
 
 
 
 * If the bit about PMC members having binding votes bothers you, solve 
 the problem by indicating interest in joining the PMC :)


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



[VOTE] POI 2.0 final release

2004-01-21 Thread Avik Sengupta
Dear Jakarta PMC

The POI community has voted to release POI 2.0 final, including 5
committer yea's and no nay's.

The dev list thread with the vote (and details of the release) is
accessible here:
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]by=threadfrom=621794

We request to the PMC to ratify this release. 
[ ] +1 
[ ]  0 
[ ] -1  

Herewith, my +1

Thanks
-
Avik (on behalf of the POI team)

PS.Sorry for the cross-posting (wasn't sure) but I imagine its best to
keep replies and votes to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

PPS. With many elected but pending members on the PMC, someone please
help me count the votes!


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