Re: Jakarta-tools ? Re: Code Sharing Concepts
I'll try again: 1. As someone said, "community is more important than code" 2. I think the real problem here is not "code sharing" - the fact that people are reticent to reuse code developed in other projects is just an effect 3. I think the real problem is that each project has it's own community and commiters, instead of a shared "jakarta community". 4. I think the only way to solve the reuse problem is to make sure that all jakarta commiters are part of the "tools/utils" project. That's my point - I'm not proposing to create ( now ) a repository open to everyone in the world, just to all interested jakarta commiters. Beeing a commiter in one of the projects means more than the fact that you have CVS access and the right to vote - it means you feel part of the project community. If you are commiter in one of the jakarta projects and you are interested in working on any "shared" code, you should automatically be a commiter for the shared piece. My proposal is to create a place where all jakarta commiters have a common interest - the shared tools. If we can't manage this - that means something is broken in the concept of "jakarta community" - and a different solution is needed. But it's worth trying ( starting with few small tools ), and see if we can manage to work togheter. We can have 10 different Pools or StringManagers - in time they'll converge or specialize and cover different niche. There is nothing wrong with having 4 solutions for a test suite, as long as all people working on this are sharing a common repository and community, and the community is open to new code ( even if it's duplicated ) as long as the code is shared. I think all "tools" should be shared - but the code is less important in this case, we should share the community ( by making all jakarta commiters members of the tools project ). Costin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Again, I don't like the idea of "framework" - i.e. a team managing all tools and releasing them as a whole. It seems what works is the idea of modules ( like CPAN modules ). And the modules should have independent life and evolution. We can tag individual packages for each project that includes it. I don't think anyone has meant to propose that. I have suggested that we create a Jakarta Components Library as a microcosm of the greater project. There would be a core group of Committers (like the PMC) who would act as the overall gatekeepers of the library. Each component in the library would have its own set of Committers, which would usually be the person or persons who wrote the original code, and who has a vested interest in the component. Each component would have its own release schedule and versioning, stable versions and latest builds. Of course, as a convenience, there might be a full library JAR of all the stable versions. If we can get this library to work for our own tools, then, of course, we should look at creating a greater CJAN library. Something like this would be more like CPAN or SourceForge, and be open to all comers. But we should weed our own garden first. -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA. -- Custom Software ~ Technical Services. -- Tel 716 425-0252; Fax 716 223-2506. -- http://www.husted.com/about/struts/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Costin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Jakarta-tools ? Re: Code Sharing Concepts
I'll try again: 1. As someone said, "community is more important than code" 2. I think the real problem here is not "code sharing" - the fact that people are reticent to reuse code developed in other projects is just an effect 3. I think the real problem is that each project has it's own community and commiters, instead of a shared "jakarta community". 4. I think the only way to solve the reuse problem is to make sure that all jakarta commiters are part of the "tools/utils" project. Agreed totally, As i remember the main complaint to this proposal was the different number of committers from one or other project, this can be resolved doing a representative vote ( 1 project 1 vote ) in this repository.. sure this is not perfect but it's possible, a perfectionist is stationary :), We need to learn a lot first we can do plans, we can suppouse, we can observe CPAN, but nobody knows better than ourself what is jakarta now, and much of us are concerned about his future, let's try to build real community now, better than tomorrow, At internet timing decisions only can be hard to take in future, let's go and do it when it's manageable and prepare things to when it become inmanageable:) My 0.02 Eur Saludos , Ignacio J. Ortega That's my point - I'm not proposing to create ( now ) a repository open to everyone in the world, just to all interested jakarta commiters. Beeing a commiter in one of the projects means more than the fact that you have CVS access and the right to vote - it means you feel part of the project community. If you are commiter in one of the jakarta projects and you are interested in working on any "shared" code, you should automatically be a commiter for the shared piece. My proposal is to create a place where all jakarta commiters have a common interest - the shared tools. If we can't manage this - that means something is broken in the concept of "jakarta community" - and a different solution is needed. But it's worth trying ( starting with few small tools ), and see if we can manage to work togheter. We can have 10 different Pools or StringManagers - in time they'll converge or specialize and cover different niche. There is nothing wrong with having 4 solutions for a test suite, as long as all people working on this are sharing a common repository and community, and the community is open to new code ( even if it's duplicated ) as long as the code is shared. I think all "tools" should be shared - but the code is less important in this case, we should share the community ( by making all jakarta commiters members of the tools project ). Costin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Again, I don't like the idea of "framework" - i.e. a team managing all tools and releasing them as a whole. It seems what works is the idea of modules ( like CPAN modules ). And the modules should have independent life and evolution. We can tag individual packages for each project that includes it. I don't think anyone has meant to propose that. I have suggested that we create a Jakarta Components Library as a microcosm of the greater project. There would be a core group of Committers (like the PMC) who would act as the overall gatekeepers of the library. Each component in the library would have its own set of Committers, which would usually be the person or persons who wrote the original code, and who has a vested interest in the component. Each component would have its own release schedule and versioning, stable versions and latest builds. Of course, as a convenience, there might be a full library JAR of all the stable versions. If we can get this library to work for our own tools, then, of course, we should look at creating a greater CJAN library. Something like this would be more like CPAN or SourceForge, and be open to all comers. But we should weed our own garden first. -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA. -- Custom Software ~ Technical Services. -- Tel 716 425-0252; Fax 716 223-2506. -- http://www.husted.com/about/struts/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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]
Re: Jakarta-tools ? Re: Code Sharing Concepts
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about starting the "reuse" quest by reusing the jakarta-tools
repository ?
Wouldn't that break the "old" version of Watchdog ("jakarta-watchdog") that still
has dependencies here?
At any rate, the process questions need to be settled now (before any of us get
any more entrenched in our attitudes :-) -- IMHO it is premature to start checking
in code.
Costin
Craig
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta-tools ? Re: Code Sharing Concepts
What about starting the "reuse" quest by reusing the jakarta-tools
repository ?
Wouldn't that break the "old" version of Watchdog ("jakarta-watchdog") that still
has dependencies here?
In what way ? By adding new directories and tools the old one shouldn't be
affected. Watchdog is using moo.jar ( which is also used by tomcat3.3 to
run the watchdog from a web application ).
At any rate, the process questions need to be settled now (before any of us get
any more entrenched in our attitudes :-) -- IMHO it is premature to start checking
in code.
I don't expect too much code to be checked in in the close future, but I
hope this will move us from "talk" state into "do" state, and maybe at
least 1-2 tools will be checked in to jumpstart the process and to allow
us to test the concepts.
It's hard to know if something will work you don't try.
--
Costin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta-tools ? Re: Code Sharing Concepts
With Java, it's led by Sun who, while far better than most corporate entitites, is not about to lead a charge to organize the world of Free Java Resources. Are you saying that your opinion of Jakarta is that it is lead by Sun? Not at all, I'm saying the direction of the Java language (note my sentance did not contain the word 'Jakarta') is lead by Sun, which I do not believe to be in error. - jc - James Diggans Phone:301.987.1756 Gene Logic, Inc. FAX: 301.987.1701 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 301.908.2477 - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta-tools ? Re: Code Sharing Concepts
Not at all, I'm saying the direction of the Java language (note my sentance did not contain the word 'Jakarta') is lead by Sun, which I do not believe to be in error. - jc It wasn't a question of error. It was simply a question to see if that was your impression at all. :-) Actually to be honest I'm very impressed w/ the Jakarta community so far, what very little I know of it. It's highly structured, a very odd thing for a (mostly?) volunteer open-source project. My mention of Sun was more to the effect of: 'Sun, being a corporation rightly out to make a buck will never expend effort to organize the (free) resources of the Java community a la CPAN. Jakarta, however, being one of the most organized Java groups I've yet to find, might have the ability to do so as they are driven chiefly by the needs of the community and not by profit.' - jc - James Diggans Phone:301.987.1756 Gene Logic, Inc. FAX: 301.987.1701 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 301.908.2477 - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
