Well, so far there seems to be a consensus to move WW under OS's umbrella.
Great! Now what? I propose the following -
1. Migrate WW with Opensymphony.
- The focus is to move the code and issue tracking to OS. I assume I would
work with Mike to make this transition happen.
- WW on SF will reference the new location. CVS and other components will be
turned off.
- WW's issue tracking on JIRA should be migrated to OS's.
- WW documentation will be changed to HTML and moved from DocBook. DocBook
code will be removed from source tree. I hate having to tote DocBook crap
around in the source tree.
- Integrate WW into OS's site.
- Migrate WW's developers to OS. Inactive developers would not be migrated.
- OS website and SF update recommendation
1. Does OS need 13 mailing lists? I suggest one general mail list, one
per module, and one cvs mail list. There should be no need to cross post
messages. If the message pertains to the group, then send it there;
otherwise, send it to the module specific list. If traffic is light enough,
then one general and one cvs would be fine with me.
2. The news announcements seem out of sync with the home page. I know it
is a pain to keep them in sync, but I think it is important since potential
new users will first read the news announcements on SF. If you decide not to
use it, then I suggest turn it off or delete old announcements and announce
that announcements are posted on the home page.
3. As a user, I don't see where to go for issue tracking. Is this on the
main web site? If so, I don't see it. Ahh!, you have to click on a product
to see the link at the bottom. That is fine, but I suggest that a brief
paragraph and link concerning issue tracking should be on the main page.
2. Announce migration.
- WW will release 1.2.
- After 1.2 release, it's time to announce WW's move. <plug>Mike should do
this.</plug>
3. Announce WW release
- This announcement will follow the migration announcement and it will be
either 1.2 or 1.3.
4. Begin work on leveraging the synergy of the merge.
- No major integration work will begin until 1.3 is released. After it is
release, a 1.3 CVS branch will be created and maintained for bug purposes.
- Integration work will be slated for 2.0 release. This work will include
leveraging synergies.
- IMO, I believe a key to OS is concise well-built building blocks. A
developer can choose to use only OS-Cache, Sitemesh, WW, FormTags,
OS-Workflow, or all of them. Abstracting out core functionality like bean
manipulation, configuration, etc. just makes sense. With core pieces
abstracted, you have a leaner, easier to maintain, easier to extend, easier
for developers to comprehend, and more popular modules. This abstraction
creates common core pieces that become rock solid because the extra review
and use they receive.
5. Synergy work
- Leverage a common infrastructure - nightly builds, build scripts,
automated tests, docs (this will be done in step 1 for web site)
- Leverage OS Core work. This includes a common bean util, configuration,
and more.
- Leverage other modules where it makes sense.
- It would be nice if the main website was redone utilizing most, if not
all, of the modules as a solid example of best practices with the modules.
Then the website itself would be a module that would be released and
available for download.
Comments on the plan?
-Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Walnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 6:41 AM
Subject: [Webwork-user] Re: [Webwork-devel] Intergrate with OpenSymphony?
> As someone from the OpenSymphony camp and a very big fan of WebWork, you
> get my +1.
>
> Though I would like to point out that if WW is under the same umbrella as
> the other OSym tools it does not mean you have to start using them (or
> vice-versa).
>
> Oh yeah, please don't impose the com.opensymphony package namespace on
> WebWork (or in fact any rules)!
>
> Cheers,
> -Joe Walnes
>
> On Mon, 01 July 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
> > Ok. It's time to bring up a former heated subject. Back
> > in March, there was a topic concerning moving WW under
> > Opensymphony. The conclusion of the debate was just to
> > hang out and wait. Since then, a lot has changed and I
> > think it is time to bring this subject up again. I
> > think WW could benefit from the exposure, common
> > infrastructure, developers, etc.
> >
> > So, I'll start off and say +1. What do you say?
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Webwork-user mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webwork-user
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Bringing you mounds of caffeinated joy.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Webwork-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webwork-user
