I'd be willing to help out with a RAT TLP. We're using it in our normal
build process for OpenJPA, Geronimo and Bean Validation, so helping out
on future votes is the least I can do.
-Donald
On 8/12/10 5:52 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Greg Stein
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
[absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
My
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana
sanj...@opensource.lk wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
all the Incubator projects, but pretty
Hi Niall,
On 8/12/10 2:52 AM, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
Clearly then there are small TLPs that operate effectively. However
any TLP that can't get 3 PMC votes is effectively dead and I don't
want to see RAT end up in that situation in a year or two. Seeing only
3 votes
best fit under the
maven
TLP.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message
From: Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J
On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
[absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
not being able to get 3 PMC votes.
I understand that and share the concern
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
[absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
not
Hi Guys,
[...]
So yes, development activity is low.
OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
fix. I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
preferred to work on other
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 15:30, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Guys,
[...]
So yes, development activity is low.
OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
fix. I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
Forgot one possible issue: Currently, RAT has its own mailing lists,
which would be unusual for Commons. My personal choice would be to
leave this as it is, but that's of course also subject to discussion.
Jochen
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jochen,
not sure if Commons is the right place sine RAT has a very spezialized
scope or to state it differently I would not look for RAT in Commons.
What about Maven TLP?
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
On 10.08.10 12:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Hi,
having just published a release of Apache
How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
an eat your own dog food type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)
...ant
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM,
On 10/08/2010 12:48, ant elder wrote:
How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
an eat your own dog food type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)
I
On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:
How about keeping it here at the Incubator?
I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
podling. But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
Infra would be fine with me if infra wanted to absorb rat.
Stefan
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:
How about keeping it here at the Incubator?
I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
podling. But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
having just published a release of Apache RAT with the -incubating
label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
Hi Jochen,
First off, congrats on even sending this email. I've often wondered by RAT is
still lingering in the Incubator when it's been pretty much widely used for a
long time, has a functional community, and keeps plugging forward with its
mission. So, first off, +1 to getting out of the
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a
RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the
team that would be able to? Hen files them
On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
anyone on the team that would be able to?
Jochen has sure be joking here. The team list he pointed at
Hi Stefan,
However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
anyone on the team that would be able to?
Jochen has sure be joking here. The team list he pointed at contains at
least two current PMC
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:58, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have
a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and
On Aug 10, 2010, at 7:03 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
Hi Stefan,
However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why
not
have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
anyone on the team that would be able to?
Jochen has sure be joking here.
On 2010-08-10, Mark Struberg wrote:
RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough
to justify an own TLP.
It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under
the maven TLP.
RAT RAT Maven Plugin. RAT initially was developed at Google Code.
Stefan
TLP.
It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the maven
TLP.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message
From: Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On Tue
Hi All,
TLPs are not expensive, so they don't have to have a minimum size
to justify their existence.
+1.
Cheers,
Chris
++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
While I second that in general, and I have argued (unsuccessfully) on
the incubator list against arbitrary size constraints for graduating
podlings, still in theory a PMC min size comes from the need to have a
sustainable quorum to vote on releases. If it can get at least 3
people to vote,
fit under the
maven
TLP.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message
From: Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J
it would best fit under the
maven
TLP.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message
From: Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris
-...@incubator.apache.org rat-...@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 7:59:12 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
Hi Dan,
Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
Who are the users of/community for RAT? If that can be determined then the
TLP should be named after
- Original Message
From: Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
I feel kind
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
snip/
WDYT?
I agree with others who've said RAT should consider going TLP.
-Rahul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
I'm +1 for TLP. No need to start creating more umbrella projects. If
finding a chair is troublesome, I'd be more than willing to fill that
gap (although I'm not on the RAT ppmc, nor have written a single line
of code for it). As a mentor and user I love the utility, so keeping
it around and making
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 06:40, Jochen Wiedmann
jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
...
WDYT?
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 15:26, Craig L Russell craig.russ...@oracle.com wrote:
...
I'd suggest letting the RAT PPMC decide what they want to do. If they are
unable to come to a decision, they can come
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 15:25, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
Hi!
Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?
If it is still
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?
Unfortunately, there
, 2010 10:48:36 PM
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly
targeted
to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also
useful
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 07:00
To: general@incubator.apache.org; rat-...@incubator.apache.org;
d...@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
However
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
If
there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
important part in the process.
There's also an SPDX spec coming to
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
rewrite it in Perl.
On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote:
It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
If it goes under infra (as some are
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 22:43, Philip M. Gollucci pgollu...@p6m7g8.com wrote:
On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote:
It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
clients/users of the tool. But
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
pgollu...@p6m7g8.com wrote:
On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote:
It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
clients/users of the tool. But
44 matches
Mail list logo
