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
Quoting "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 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]
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 w
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, ...
Henri Yandell wrote:
Multiple PMCs is not a problem. There are James, Maven people on the
Jakarta PMC etc.
The idea below still concerns me. 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
Multiple PMCs is not a problem. There are James, Maven people on the
Jakarta PMC etc.
The idea below still concerns me. 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 PM
From what I have understood today, this seems like a nice option to me to straighten things out.
+1
-Harish
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 develop
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 conte
I'm not asking for a change, I only see a lot of mails again and again
about the board asking for more insight into the working of jakarta.
Same with the whole jakarta-commons & apache-commons discussion.
If this can be solved by just doing some paperwork (writing down who
is supervising what) t
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 r
+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 m
On Dec 18, 2003, at 3:17 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Dec 18, 2003, at 3:08 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
Ah now it all makes sense :)
May be this should be included with the CLA and then there would be
no reason to lobby for more members, really.
We want to m
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Dec 18, 2003, at 3:08 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
Ah now it all makes sense :)
May be this should be included with the CLA and then there would be
no reason to lobby for more members, really.
We want to make sure that the PMC members are committers who under
On Dec 18, 2003, at 3:08 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
Ah now it all makes sense :)
May be this should be included with the CLA and then there would be no
reason to lobby for more members, really.
We want to make sure that the PMC members are committers who understand
the responsibility and
Ah now it all makes sense :)
May be this should be included with the CLA and then there would be no reason to lobby for more
members, really.
-Harish
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I don't see the distinction between a PMC member and a committer.
<> You catch on quickly. :-) The difference is that
Your call. As long as you're active, you pass muster to be on the PMC.
Whether you want to be is up to you and how happy you are joining
something that is not too sure about responsibilities etc.
I've seen nothing that says you can't quit at any time though, so I think
there's very little risk inv
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 differe
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.
On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 14:03, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Either it would roll back to the old style as Tomcat + friends, or would
> become the Java-Foundry for Apache [a la Sourceforge], or would become
> Jakarta Commons, or both of the latter two. Dunno what other visions there
> might be out there for
Henri Yandell wrote:
Obviously, something is afoot ... otherwise, why are healthy projects
moving out of Jakarta, up to the top level (Ant, Maven and now logging)?
Is that the destiny of Jakarta, to be a second-level incubator for
projects on the way to TLP status? If so ... embrace that.
As
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 conf
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
>
>
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
> >
> >
> >>If the aim of the PMC is to house a vast majority of committers, and if
> >>the role of a PMC member is simply to follow some guidelines and
> >>regula
> I don't see the distinction between a PMC member and a committer.
<> You catch on quickly. :-) The difference is that a PMC member, as
a normative statement, has a binding vote on the project. By allowing
someone to become a Committer, you allow direct contribution to the
codebase, but the PM
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 c
Henri Yandell wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
If the aim of the PMC is to house a vast majority of committers, and if
the role of a PMC member is simply to follow some guidelines and
regulate development, I don't see the distinction between a PMC member
and a committer.
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
> If the aim of the PMC is to house a vast majority of committers, and if
> the role of a PMC member is simply to follow some guidelines and
> regulate development, I don't see the distinction between a PMC member
> and a committer. If the PMC memb
Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> The more I see of this discussion, the more convinced I am that
> the sub-projects of Jakarta should be run like "mini-TLPs".
> We want to leverage the marketing power of the Jakarta brand,
> the experience of the other Jakarta developers, and some
> infrastructure suppo
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The more I see of this discussion, the more convinced I am that the
> sub-projects of Jakarta should be run like "mini-TLPs". We want to
> leverage the marketing power of the Jakarta brand, the experience of the
> other Jakarta developers, and some
If the aim of the PMC is to house a vast majority of committers, and if the role of a PMC member is
simply to follow some guidelines and regulate development, I don't see the distinction between a PMC
member and a committer. If the PMC membership requires legal and governing skills, I am not sure
On Dec 18, 2003, at 1:46 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The more I see of this discussion, the more convinced I am that the
sub-projects of Jakarta should be run like "mini-TLPs". We want to
leverage the marketing power of the Jakarta brand, the experience of
the other Jakarta developers, and som
The more I see of this discussion, the more convinced I am that the sub-projects of
Jakarta should be run like "mini-TLPs". We want to leverage the marketing power of the
Jakarta brand, the experience of the other Jakarta developers, and some infrastructure
support (web page, CVS, mailing lists,
31 matches
Mail list logo
