On 07/15/11 15:40, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On 2011-07-15, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
snip
I'm very keen on building
a single, language agnostic community.
I think I understand that and I don't think the existing Ant, Maven or
Commons communities would fit in here. In particular, neither
On 2011-07-14, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On 07/08/11 09:09, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 7 July 2011 22:07, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:
So we have seen that RAT can be more than the sum parts of its acronym :)
The Incubator is no place for a project to languish forever.
The
Stefan Bodewig:
To me it sounds as if you are looking for a home for a bunch of scripts
we use around the release process. Something we don't really have, so
a new TLP seems more appropriate - if we have and keep the momentum.
This new TLP would likely be more focussed on users that are
On 07/15/11 08:44, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
snip
I don't really see how Maven or Ant would fit if the only integration to
their flagships is by spawning a new process (or maybe run the scripts
in VM using Jython, I don't know).
To me it sounds as if you are looking for a home for a bunch of
On 2011-07-15, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On 07/15/11 08:44, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
I don't really see how Maven or Ant would fit if the only integration to
their flagships is by spawning a new process (or maybe run the scripts
in VM using Jython, I don't know).
To me it sounds as if you
-Original Message-
From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
Sent: Friday, 8 July 2011 6:10 PM
To: rat-dev@incubator.apache.org; ga...@16degrees.com.au
Subject: Re: Future For Rat...?
On 7 July 2011 22:07, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:
So we have
On 07/07/11 22:04, Gavin McDonald wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Robert Burrell Donkin [mailto:rdon...@apache.org]
and about tooling for OpenOffice.org
in what way?
Comprehension tools are a necessity for OOo
(and why single out one project)
OpenOffice is the first podling
On 7 July 2011 22:07, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:
So we have seen that RAT can be more than the sum parts of its acronym :)
The Incubator is no place for a project to languish forever.
The only sensible option in my opinion now is TLP.
I was in two minds, but given that
On 8 July 2011 07:58, Robert Burrell Donkin rdon...@apache.org wrote:
On 07/07/11 22:04, Gavin McDonald wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Robert Burrell Donkin [mailto:rdon...@apache.org]
and about tooling for OpenOffice.org
in what way?
Comprehension tools are a necessity for OOo
-Original Message-
From: Robert Burrell Donkin [mailto:rdon...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 29 June 2011 12:16 AM
To: rat-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Future For Rat...?
(back again from visiting my brother)
snip
On 06/17/11 14:28, sebb wrote:
On 17 June 2011 14
of here, now!
Gav...
-Original Message-
From: Robert Burrell Donkin [mailto:rdon...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 29 June 2011 12:16 AM
To: rat-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Future For Rat...?
(back again from visiting my brother)
snip
On 06/17/11 14:28, sebb wrote:
On 17
(back again from visiting my brother)
snip
On 06/17/11 14:28, sebb wrote:
On 17 June 2011 14:01, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2011-06-15, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
I'm involved with some release and build wrangling over at James (and
probably in the OO.o podling as well).
On 2011-06-15, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
(My recovery has progressed, and I have now enough computer time -
around 4 hours per day but not continuous - to start some coding and
Apache stuff again :-)
Good to hear that.
I'm involved with some release and build wrangling over at James (and
On 17 June 2011 14:01, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2011-06-15, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
(My recovery has progressed, and I have now enough computer time -
around 4 hours per day but not continuous - to start some coding and
Apache stuff again :-)
Good to hear that.
+1
On 06/15/11 15:18, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
rdon...@apache.org wrote:
TLP? Opinions?
And how close is Rat to being able to graduate?
My personal view remains that Rat is too small for a TLP and would be
far better off as a subproject
I agree that the current code base is too small for a TLP but it's been
hard to find anywhere suitable. Maybe we need to think now about
creating a suitable TLP for this code base and other similar stuff.
You don't think Commons would fit?
Just curious :-)
On 16/06/2011 13:27, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On 06/15/11 15:18, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
rdon...@apache.org wrote:
TLP? Opinions?
And how close is Rat to being able to graduate?
My personal view remains that Rat is too small for a
On 06/16/11 13:40, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
I agree that the current code base is too small for a TLP but it's been
hard to find anywhere suitable. Maybe we need to think now about
creating a suitable TLP for this code base and other similar stuff.
You don't think Commons would fit?
Hi
(My recovery has progressed, and I have now enough computer time -
around 4 hours per day but not continuous - to start some coding and
Apache stuff again :-)
I'm involved with some release and build wrangling over at James (and
probably in the OO.o podling as well). I'm likely to need to
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
rdon...@apache.org wrote:
TLP? Opinions?
And how close is Rat to being able to graduate?
My personal view remains that Rat is too small for a TLP and would be
far better off as a subproject of commons, or whatever might make
sense. If
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org wrote:
So where is RAT going with respect to functionality. Is it really complete
in it's current form, as some people have suggested?
Don't get me wrong, it's a great tool for a very limited use case (I do use
it outside
On 17/08/2010 14:42, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:55 AM, Ross Gardlerrgard...@apache.org wrote:
Something where I could say are we overlooking a potential committer or do any
committers appear to have gone emeritus without telling us.
You may be interested in something
On 2010-08-17, Ross Gardler wrote:
So for now I'd rather keep the question simple:
Is it done?
For all I wanted RAT to do, it is.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't be around to help or even contribute as
time permits if people want to implement the full scope of the proposal,
I just lack the time
On 16 Aug 2010, at 21:41, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2010-08-16, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
...
If RAT is going anywhere we must ensure it has enough people who care -
of which there seem to be plenty, they may need to be recruited, though.
Well, as a mentor of RAT, a user
On 2010-08-16, Ross Gardler wrote:
I think the general RAT is great vibe of the discussion was
misrepresentative of what RAT currently is. There is not much to RAT
at present other than a very complex pattern matcher that ensures
license headers are present.
It does not audit releases and
Hi,
now that the waves are flattened again, the first thing I should
probably do is to apologize: Had I anticipated the multitude of
reactions, I'd have put my question to this mailing list, rather than
to several. However, I expected no more than 2 or 3 replies, that's
why the broad audience
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:
The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
time to time, and so
:
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:
The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
time to time
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 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.
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
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
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 07:00
To: gene...@incubator.apache.org; rat-dev@incubator.apache.org;
d...@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: Future of RAT
On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
However
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 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
35 matches
Mail list logo
