Martin,
Jakarta is
Components
Sandbox
Things move from sandbox to components.
That would be fine if there was a well-defined scope for the sandbox.
Should be the same as the scope for Jakarta. Define that, and you may have
your answer.
--- Noel
On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 00:48 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
What would be the constraints on what could go in there? Anything, as long
as it's written in or for Java?
My fault, I thought we'd had a long thread on this before so didn't do
much explaining.
The same as Commons Sandbox
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an
HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff.
I'm not opposed to a POI-sandbox (indeed we have one but call it
scratchpad) for POI-related stuff. However
On 4/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an
HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff.
I'm not opposed to a POI-sandbox (indeed we have
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 4/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an
HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff.
I'm
On 4/10/06, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 4/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:31 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say
an
However Jakarta-sandbox is
SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on sourceforge IMO. If you want
to start a whole NEW project then do that in the incubator IMO.
Why on sourceforge - why not on our infrastructure?
What the difference for you?
You want every tiny (commons) library go
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Torsten Curdt wrote:
However Jakarta-sandbox is
SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on sourceforge IMO. If you want
to start a whole NEW project then do that in the incubator IMO.
Why on sourceforge - why not on our infrastructure?
What the difference for you?
You
Why? Do you need something to do? I have many unworked open source
tasks that I could pass on. I'm happy to help you along on them.
Seriously.
Henri Yandell wrote:
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Torsten Curdt wrote:
However Jakarta-sandbox is
SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on
y
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Henri Yandell wrote:
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
-1 on these points
1. There should not be an escape from the pain of the incubator. All new
projects must go through the incubator and endure. Commons sandbox was
created
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 4/8/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henri Yandell wrote:
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
-1 on these points
1. There should not be an escape from the pain of the incubator. All
new projects must go through the
On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 00:51 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Simon Kitching wrote:
And who is expected to subscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Those who want to? :)
I imagine those working on sandbox components at the moment, plus a
handful of people who tend to subscribe to
So basically if I call my project a component I don't have to go
through the incubator just YOUR
incubator.
Nope, poor explanation on my part. Code created within the Apache
community does not have to go through the incubator at all. The only bit
component refers to is related to Martin's
On 4/9/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip/
Ideally, a sandbox project should be adopted by its closest living
relative, and use that project's list until it grows up. This
[EMAIL PROTECTED] idea looks more like a communal orphanage to me...
Of course if a big bunch of people
* Create development mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
sandbox-dev@ ?
Otherwise, fine.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. There should not be an escape from the pain of the incubator.
All new projects must go through the incubator and endure.
ACO's gratuitously snarky comments aside, projects coming into the ASF go
through the Incubator. New things started entirely within the ASF do not,
currently.
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 10:20 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
snip
Totally NOT how the incubator was described to me. As I understand it
if Tomcat (for instance) wants to create a new JSP engine, that's kosher
for Tomcat. However if someone in POI wanted to create a new AI engine
(having
Based on that what WOULD BE out of scope of today's commons or this
MEGA-sandbox or this JCL or whatever?
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 10:20 -0400, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
snip
Totally NOT how the incubator was described to me. As I understand it
if Tomcat (for
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
projects coming into the ASF go through the Incubator. New things
started entirely within the ASF do not, currently.
Then there is no NEED for a sandbox.
As you know, the sandbox predates the Incubator, and AIUI, the Sandbox
exists so as to
Yes. A lot of things predate the incubator. I'm not opposed to say an
HTTPD-sandbox for experimental HTTPD related stuff.
I'm not opposed to a POI-sandbox (indeed we have one but call it
scratchpad) for POI-related stuff. However Jakarta-sandbox is
SCOPELESS. Go have a scopeless sandbox on
-1 on these points
1. There should not be an escape from the pain of the incubator. All
new projects must go through the incubator and endure. Commons sandbox
was created prior to the incubator.
2. No to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it is a MEGA-list for all of
Jakarta. The commons list is
Am Freitag, den 07.04.2006, 19:17 -0400 schrieb Henri Yandell:
Calling a vote to create a Jakarta Sandbox; which entails:
* Move Jakarta Commons Sandbox to Jakarta Sandbox
* Migrate Jakarta Taglibs Sandbox into Jakarta Sandbox
* Create development mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
*
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
-1 on these points
1. There should not be an escape from the pain of the incubator. All new
projects must go through the incubator and endure. Commons sandbox was
created prior to the incubator.
Nope, all new communities must go through the
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Rainer Klute wrote:
Am Freitag, den 07.04.2006, 19:17 -0400 schrieb Henri Yandell:
Calling a vote to create a Jakarta Sandbox; which entails:
* Move Jakarta Commons Sandbox to Jakarta Sandbox
* Migrate Jakarta Taglibs Sandbox into Jakarta Sandbox
* Create
On 4/8/06, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henri Yandell wrote:
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
-1 on these points
1. There should not be an escape from the pain of the incubator. All
new projects must go through the incubator and endure. Commons
sandbox
On 4/7/06, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Calling a vote to create a Jakarta Sandbox; which entails:
* Move Jakarta Commons Sandbox to Jakarta Sandbox
* Migrate Jakarta Taglibs Sandbox into Jakarta Sandbox
* Create development mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Create wiki
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 16:28 -0700, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 4/7/06, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Calling a vote to create a Jakarta Sandbox; which entails:
* Move Jakarta Commons Sandbox to Jakarta Sandbox
* Migrate Jakarta Taglibs Sandbox into Jakarta Sandbox
*
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 4/7/06, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Calling a vote to create a Jakarta Sandbox; which entails:
* Move Jakarta Commons Sandbox to Jakarta Sandbox
* Migrate Jakarta Taglibs Sandbox into Jakarta Sandbox
* Create development mailing
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Simon Kitching wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 16:28 -0700, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 4/7/06, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Calling a vote to create a Jakarta Sandbox; which entails:
* Move Jakarta Commons Sandbox to Jakarta Sandbox
* Migrate Jakarta Taglibs
29 matches
Mail list logo
