You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-dev@james.apache.org by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org> on 2002/10/24 12:58:45 UTC
Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the futureof Apache. )
I don't know how many, if any, commiters are also on the reorg@ list, but I thought I'd FW this mail in case you're not.
To sumarise theres a feeling abroad that Apache should be less vertical and more horizontal in its organisation, that Jakarta is unbalancing things by being so big, and that "The Apache Way" is being diluted as a result (don't flame me I'm just passing it on ;).
To address this there has been a proposal that sub-projects can be elevated to full "xxxx.apache.org" project status, and as you can see from the appended message James has been suggested as a candidate.
This would involve James having its own PMC, and reporting to the board, and would benefit from higher percieved "status".
Alternatively there is also a move afoot to allow self-categorisation of projects, removing the benefit of "status" from the action of elevation to full project.
Now.. I don't know how long the internal machinations of reorg, or the Board will take, and I would be a fool if I second guessed the outcome, but out of curiosity are we generally in favour or opposed to being a top level project with our own elected PMC?
(I'll save my own opinion 'till I hear some others)
d.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:nicolaken@apache.org]
> Sent: 24 October 2002 10:17
> To: reorg@apache.org
> Cc: Peter Donald; Stefano Mazzocchi; Jason van Zyl; acoliver;
> danny@apache.org; bodewig@apache.org; Steven Noels
> Subject: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the
> futureof Apache. )
>
>
>
> Peter Donald wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:06, Sam Ruby wrote:
> >
> >>Peter Donald wrote:
> >>
> >>>I doubt you will see any projects leave willingly while others are
> >>>allowed to stay behind.
> >>
> >>I want to create an environment where those that chose to "leave the
> >>nest" have every opportunity to do so, and get all the assistance that
> >>they need in making this transition.
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > Have you got a list prepared of those that will be "gently
> nudged out of the
> > nest" ?
>
> I'll start with the projects I know of that IMO would immediately be
> ready to be top-level and have their internal managing to do.
>
> These are strong communities that already manage themselves and will now
> be able to report directly to the board IIUC.
>
> Cocoon: XML processing system
> composed of core+apps+docs
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Stefano Mazzocchi
>
> Avalon: Service Framework and Server
> composed framework+containers (Phoenix, fortress, merlin, etc)
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Peter Donald
>
> Turbine: Server
> composed of 2,3,Plexus, (or somewhere else later), TDK, etc
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Jason Van Zyl
>
> Maven: project management, comprehension and build system
> composed of core+plugins
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Jason Van Zyl
>
> POI: M$ format libraries
> composed of HDF+HSSF+...etc
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Andrew C. Oliver
>
> James: Mail Server
> composed of Mailet spec, Server
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Danny Angus
>
> Slide: CMS
> other non-Apache projects have asked to be part of the CMS effort
> possible coordinator of the proposal: ?
>
> Forrest: Community Tools
> composed of bot, editor, site
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Steven Noels
>
> Ant:
> composed of Java Ant, Nant(maybe), Centipede(maybe)
> possible coordinator of the proposal: Stefan Boedwig
>
> As for Turbine and Avalon Components I'll make a small proposal myself
> on the lists to make an Avalon Component space at commons.apache, as
> hinted on the commons.apache.list.
>
> -0-
>
> If anyone here on this list wants to help, please involve these
> communities and make a proposal ready, as previously hinted, a bit
> before the Apache Conference.
>
> I hope I'll be left with no project to lobby ;-) , but if nobody else
> takes up this task I'll try myself.
>
> If there are any other projects you know of that might be interested,
> please contact them similarly ASAP.
>
> Let's start this flattening from the bottom! :-D
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by Harmeet Bedi <ha...@kodemuse.com>.
One problems with reorg is that it often takes some time for things to
settle down.
One conservative approach could be to make minimum reorg changes for some
time and then as things settle down pick the right pattern to follow.
That being said, I think it is good to monitor reorg. Not sure what James as
a top level project will change, but it does sound impressive.
Harmeet
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re:
Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by Charles Benett <ch...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>I don't know how many, if any, commiters are also on the reorg@ list, but I thought I'd FW this mail in case you're not.
>
Good idea. I signed up for reorg when first announced and signed off the
next day under the weight of emails.
Charles
>
>To sumarise theres a feeling abroad that Apache should be less vertical and more horizontal in its organisation, that Jakarta is unbalancing things by being so big, and that "The Apache Way" is being diluted as a result (don't flame me I'm just passing it on ;).
>
>To address this there has been a proposal that sub-projects can be elevated to full "xxxx.apache.org" project status, and as you can see from the appended message James has been suggested as a candidate.
>
>This would involve James having its own PMC, and reporting to the board, and would benefit from higher percieved "status".
>Alternatively there is also a move afoot to allow self-categorisation of projects, removing the benefit of "status" from the action of elevation to full project.
>
>Now.. I don't know how long the internal machinations of reorg, or the Board will take, and I would be a fool if I second guessed the outcome, but out of curiosity are we generally in favour or opposed to being a top level project with our own elected PMC?
>
>(I'll save my own opinion 'till I hear some others)
>d.
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:nicolaken@apache.org]
>>Sent: 24 October 2002 10:17
>>To: reorg@apache.org
>>Cc: Peter Donald; Stefano Mazzocchi; Jason van Zyl; acoliver;
>>danny@apache.org; bodewig@apache.org; Steven Noels
>>Subject: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the
>>futureof Apache. )
>>
>>
>>
>>Peter Donald wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:06, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Peter Donald wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I doubt you will see any projects leave willingly while others are
>>>>>allowed to stay behind.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I want to create an environment where those that chose to "leave the
>>>>nest" have every opportunity to do so, and get all the assistance that
>>>>they need in making this transition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>[...]
>>
>>
>>
>>>Have you got a list prepared of those that will be "gently
>>>
>>>
>>nudged out of the
>>
>>
>>>nest" ?
>>>
>>>
>>I'll start with the projects I know of that IMO would immediately be
>>ready to be top-level and have their internal managing to do.
>>
>>These are strong communities that already manage themselves and will now
>>be able to report directly to the board IIUC.
>>
>>Cocoon: XML processing system
>> composed of core+apps+docs
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Stefano Mazzocchi
>>
>>Avalon: Service Framework and Server
>> composed framework+containers (Phoenix, fortress, merlin, etc)
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Peter Donald
>>
>>Turbine: Server
>> composed of 2,3,Plexus, (or somewhere else later), TDK, etc
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Jason Van Zyl
>>
>>Maven: project management, comprehension and build system
>> composed of core+plugins
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Jason Van Zyl
>>
>>POI: M$ format libraries
>> composed of HDF+HSSF+...etc
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Andrew C. Oliver
>>
>>James: Mail Server
>> composed of Mailet spec, Server
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Danny Angus
>>
>>Slide: CMS
>> other non-Apache projects have asked to be part of the CMS effort
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: ?
>>
>>Forrest: Community Tools
>> composed of bot, editor, site
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Steven Noels
>>
>>Ant:
>> composed of Java Ant, Nant(maybe), Centipede(maybe)
>> possible coordinator of the proposal: Stefan Boedwig
>>
>>As for Turbine and Avalon Components I'll make a small proposal myself
>>on the lists to make an Avalon Component space at commons.apache, as
>>hinted on the commons.apache.list.
>>
>> -0-
>>
>>If anyone here on this list wants to help, please involve these
>>communities and make a proposal ready, as previously hinted, a bit
>>before the Apache Conference.
>>
>>I hope I'll be left with no project to lobby ;-) , but if nobody else
>>takes up this task I'll try myself.
>>
>>If there are any other projects you know of that might be interested,
>>please contact them similarly ASAP.
>>
>>Let's start this flattening from the bottom! :-D
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>--
>>Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
>> - verba volant, scripta manent -
>> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re:Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
As I understand it there is the potential for Jakarta projects to apply to "jump-ship" now, irrespective of the outcome of the reorg.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:sergek@lokitech.com]
> Sent: 24 October 2002 18:07
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: Re: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was
> Re:Concern about the futureof Apache. )
>
>
> I think it could help James to have it promoted, but am not sure about
> the impact of making that many projects higher level. The value of that
> top status is diminished if you allow too many. As an alternative, you
> could split jakarta into the three categories specified on the home page
> (libraries/tools/API, frameworks/engines, and server applications). To
> me it depends on the priorities driving the reorg... whether it's to
> keep jakarta for more fledging code, to improve communication between
> projects, to improve visibility for more mature code, or what have you.
>
> Anyway, I'm on the mailing list (well, the new community@ list), and if
> there is a move to push some jakarta projects to top level, I'd like to
> see James moved as well. I'm just not sure yet if that exact reorg is
> the best.
>
> --
> Serge Knystautas
> Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites
> http://www.lokitech.com
>
> Danny Angus wrote:
> > I don't know how many, if any, commiters are also on the reorg@
> list, but I thought I'd FW this mail in case you're not.
> >
> > To sumarise theres a feeling abroad that Apache should be less
> vertical and more horizontal in its organisation, that Jakarta is
> unbalancing things by being so big, and that "The Apache Way" is
> being diluted as a result (don't flame me I'm just passing it on ;).
> >
> > To address this there has been a proposal that sub-projects can
> be elevated to full "xxxx.apache.org" project status, and as you
> can see from the appended message James has been suggested as a candidate.
> >
> > This would involve James having its own PMC, and reporting to
> the board, and would benefit from higher percieved "status".
> > Alternatively there is also a move afoot to allow
> self-categorisation of projects, removing the benefit of "status"
> from the action of elevation to full project.
> >
> > Now.. I don't know how long the internal machinations of reorg,
> or the Board will take, and I would be a fool if I second guessed
> the outcome, but out of curiosity are we generally in favour or
> opposed to being a top level project with our own elected PMC?
> >
> > (I'll save my own opinion 'till I hear some others)
> > d.
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> What is your opinion re James as a top-level project?
Roy T. Fielding's message paints a completely different picture than that
presented, or at least understood by me from earlier messages. His message
suggests that it was always the intent for projects to form a PMC as they
matured, and that this is for legal reasons completely unrelated to any
reorganization of the Jakarta site, or other issue previously raised.
Based upon Roy T. Fielding's message, I think that it would be foolish NOT
to form a PMC. Any issues of site reorganization are completely orthogonal
to the legal issue of forming a PMC.
Since there is no other project under which we would properly be subsumed,
we clearly SHOULD form a PMC. So +1 on the PMC.
Many thanks for Nico for the clarification.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
Noel,
1st this is probably better suited to reorg@apache.org
2nd What is your opinion re James as a top-level project?
other points below..
> Good things could come from a reorg, but my own view as a non-insider is
> that the interests of outside users (e.g, the potential consuming
> developers) should be incorporated into any reorg that is visible
> on the web
> site(s).
This is all under (full and heated!) discussion
> If there were to be a reorg, I'd want thought put into semantic
> relationships. Yes, things like taglibs and struts can be used with other
> servlet engines than Tomcat, but we need to make it easy for
> people to find
> things and pull them together related technologies. As Serge noted,
> increased visibility for specific projects could be a good thing for the
> right project(s), but too broad a tree makes it harder to see the
> forest for
> the trees.
There have been discussions on the distinction between external appearances and internal structures, and discussions around the notion of self-categorisation by projects.
> FWIW, it might be nice if there were a matchers/mailets
> sub-project of James
> similar to the taglib (sub-)project. But that can be dealt with after we
> address the classloading issues.
Yeah, its a long term plan of mine to see mailet seperated off as a fully independant su-project of James, and a project delivering James independant mailets/matchers would align well with this.
>
> Questions:
>
> Is there any real infrastructure related issue for reorganizing?
> If so, what?
Yeah Brian has suggested making Source Cast available to the ASF, there have been other discussions relating to the process of self-categorisation of projects, but its early days.
So far the two concrete things to emerge have been the apache-incubator project, and the confirmation that jakarta sub-projects (EG james etc) can petition the board for elevation to project status.
> Does the fact that Tomcat isn't on the list reveal an underlying
> "jealousy" that Tomcat is the perceived BMOC on the Jakarta
> campus, and some people want more mindshare?
Isn't it? or is it that TC is obvoius and well represented by foundation members?
>
> Is this reorg being considered to encourage some projects to
> stay, rather than jump ship after having established themselves?
No, I believe its come about as a result of a general ill-defined dissatisfaction with the current situation, the size of jakarta, the danger of losing sight of "The Apache Way", and the widespread desire to see Apache *not* become simply a sourceforge.
IMO there is no crisis, or definite timescale, but to avert a future crisis, and to have time to ramble through the usual interminable debating, discussions are starting now.
>
> What would the reorg impose upon projects?
AFAIK nothing that was not agreed by projects, PMC's, sub-projects or whomever is the relevant group.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re: Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
These are just my off-the-cuff thoughts. However, I did spend time going
through the jakarta.apache.org and xml.apache.org sites, and authoring a
roadmap for developers (see:
www.softwaresummit.com/2002/speakers/bergman.htm), so I think I have some
notion of the perspective of developers who are more concerned with making
use of Jakarta technologies than in how Apache manages itself internally.
Good things could come from a reorg, but my own view as a non-insider is
that the interests of outside users (e.g, the potential consuming
developers) should be incorporated into any reorg that is visible on the web
site(s).
If there were to be a reorg, I'd want thought put into semantic
relationships. Yes, things like taglibs and struts can be used with other
servlet engines than Tomcat, but we need to make it easy for people to find
things and pull them together related technologies. As Serge noted,
increased visibility for specific projects could be a good thing for the
right project(s), but too broad a tree makes it harder to see the forest for
the trees.
FWIW, it might be nice if there were a matchers/mailets sub-project of James
similar to the taglib (sub-)project. But that can be dealt with after we
address the classloading issues.
Questions:
Is there any real infrastructure related issue for reorganizing?
If so, what?
Does the fact that Tomcat isn't on the list reveal an underlying
"jealousy" that Tomcat is the perceived BMOC on the Jakarta
campus, and some people want more mindshare?
Is this reorg being considered to encourage some projects to
stay, rather than jump ship after having established themselves?
What would the reorg impose upon projects?
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Straw poll : FW: Projects to nudge into top-level ( was Re:
Concern about the futureof Apache. )
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
I think it could help James to have it promoted, but am not sure about
the impact of making that many projects higher level. The value of that
top status is diminished if you allow too many. As an alternative, you
could split jakarta into the three categories specified on the home page
(libraries/tools/API, frameworks/engines, and server applications). To
me it depends on the priorities driving the reorg... whether it's to
keep jakarta for more fledging code, to improve communication between
projects, to improve visibility for more mature code, or what have you.
Anyway, I'm on the mailing list (well, the new community@ list), and if
there is a move to push some jakarta projects to top level, I'd like to
see James moved as well. I'm just not sure yet if that exact reorg is
the best.
--
Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites
http://www.lokitech.com
Danny Angus wrote:
> I don't know how many, if any, commiters are also on the reorg@ list, but I thought I'd FW this mail in case you're not.
>
> To sumarise theres a feeling abroad that Apache should be less vertical and more horizontal in its organisation, that Jakarta is unbalancing things by being so big, and that "The Apache Way" is being diluted as a result (don't flame me I'm just passing it on ;).
>
> To address this there has been a proposal that sub-projects can be elevated to full "xxxx.apache.org" project status, and as you can see from the appended message James has been suggested as a candidate.
>
> This would involve James having its own PMC, and reporting to the board, and would benefit from higher percieved "status".
> Alternatively there is also a move afoot to allow self-categorisation of projects, removing the benefit of "status" from the action of elevation to full project.
>
> Now.. I don't know how long the internal machinations of reorg, or the Board will take, and I would be a fool if I second guessed the outcome, but out of curiosity are we generally in favour or opposed to being a top level project with our own elected PMC?
>
> (I'll save my own opinion 'till I hear some others)
> d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>