You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@commons.apache.org by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org> on 2002/10/25 00:32:05 UTC
Re: [VOTE: commons lists]
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 05:15:10PM -0500, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> [Somebody forgot to change the subject. Tsk. Tsk. :-) ]
>
> > [X] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
> > [ ] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
> > [ ] Per-language mailing lists
> > [ ] ____________________________________________
>
> The incubator PMC is going to have to keep an eye on things in the
> main list and help breakout as necessary.
s/incubator/commons/ I presume?
And my vote:
[X] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [VOTE: commons lists]
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <an...@superlinksoftware.com>.
oh gosh... per concept...please :-)
Greg Stein wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 05:15:10PM -0500, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
>
>>[Somebody forgot to change the subject. Tsk. Tsk. :-) ]
>>
>>
>>
>>> [X] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
>>> [ ] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
>>> [ ] Per-language mailing lists
>>> [ ] ____________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>The incubator PMC is going to have to keep an eye on things in the
>>main list and help breakout as necessary.
>>
>>
>
>s/incubator/commons/ I presume?
>
>And my vote:
>
> [X] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
>
>
>Cheers,
>-g
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 11:36:48PM +0100, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> BTW: Whose votes are binding? or is this just indicative?
> Stephen
I personally would like to find out what everyone on this list thinks
about every vote or every issue. In one possible case, the people on
this list can make referendums that are ratified by the PMC. So, please
vote and voice your opinion.
-aaron
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:19:44PM -0500, Michael A. Smith wrote:
> Just as an observation, one of the things that occurs in jakarta, is
> that there is hardly any discussion (that I know of) on the pmc@ mailing
> list. Instead, the Jakarta PMC elects to have their discussions on the
> general@ mailing list to ensure that all can have their voice heard.
In general I agree. One thing that I won't budge on is votes for a new
PMC member or committer. IMHO, those must happen on the PMC list.
> > I believe the list of initial committers to 'commons' (note: this doesn't
> > imply eventual commit privs on components) would be something like:
> >
> > sanders, scoleburne, mas, bayard, morgand
>
> Another observation: Each of these are jakarta-commons committers. :)
Please speak up, and feel free to nominate others. :)
-aaron
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Greg Stein wrote:
[...]
> And we may as well start on recognizing certain committers, too. I'll start
> that discussion in the pmc@. We don't have any decision rules yet...
>
> I believe the list of initial committers to 'commons' (note: this doesn't
> imply eventual commit privs on components) would be something like:
>
> sanders, scoleburne, mas, bayard, morgand
>
> If I didn't list you, then please send in your name :-)
nicolaken
I've contacted the Turbine and Avalon lists about the creation of a
commmon repository of Avalon Components/Services here, and would like to
help the effort.
I'm also willing to help on the site, being a Forrest dev.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net>.
mvdb..
Mvgr,
Martin
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 01:07, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 03:51:44PM -0700, Scott Sanders wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 03:44:05PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > IMO, all the participants on this list are casting binding votes for the
> > > structure. The PMC would reserve the right to prevent "destructive" choices,
> > > but I can't see how poor mailing list organization could truly be labelled
> > > as destructive :-)
> > >
> > > As a matter of fact, I'm recording these votes right now in the STATUS
> > > document. In there, I'd consider the organizational aspects to be voted on
> > > by the affected community. However, I believe the PMC has the only binding
> > > votes for the charter (what is a "proper" component to be managed by this
> > > Project); you may note that I listed 'mas' as non-binding for one of the
> > > votes.
> >
> > Shall I just submit a patch with my name all over it then?
>
> Yup. That would work for now.
>
> And we may as well start on recognizing certain committers, too. I'll start
> that discussion in the pmc@. We don't have any decision rules yet...
>
> I believe the list of initial committers to 'commons' (note: this doesn't
> imply eventual commit privs on components) would be something like:
>
> sanders, scoleburne, mas, bayard, morgand
>
> If I didn't list you, then please send in your name :-)
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> --
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Greg Stein wrote:
> And we may as well start on recognizing certain committers, too. I'll start
> that discussion in the pmc@. We don't have any decision rules yet...
Just as an observation, one of the things that occurs in jakarta, is
that there is hardly any discussion (that I know of) on the pmc@ mailing
list. Instead, the Jakarta PMC elects to have their discussions on the
general@ mailing list to ensure that all can have their voice heard.
> I believe the list of initial committers to 'commons' (note: this doesn't
> imply eventual commit privs on components) would be something like:
>
> sanders, scoleburne, mas, bayard, morgand
Another observation: Each of these are jakarta-commons committers. :)
regards,
michael
--
Michael A. Smith
mas@apache.org
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 03:51:44PM -0700, Scott Sanders wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 03:44:05PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > IMO, all the participants on this list are casting binding votes for the
> > structure. The PMC would reserve the right to prevent "destructive" choices,
> > but I can't see how poor mailing list organization could truly be labelled
> > as destructive :-)
> >
> > As a matter of fact, I'm recording these votes right now in the STATUS
> > document. In there, I'd consider the organizational aspects to be voted on
> > by the affected community. However, I believe the PMC has the only binding
> > votes for the charter (what is a "proper" component to be managed by this
> > Project); you may note that I listed 'mas' as non-binding for one of the
> > votes.
>
> Shall I just submit a patch with my name all over it then?
Yup. That would work for now.
And we may as well start on recognizing certain committers, too. I'll start
that discussion in the pmc@. We don't have any decision rules yet...
I believe the list of initial committers to 'commons' (note: this doesn't
imply eventual commit privs on components) would be something like:
sanders, scoleburne, mas, bayard, morgand
If I didn't list you, then please send in your name :-)
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Scott Sanders <sa...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 03:44:05PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> IMO, all the participants on this list are casting binding votes for the
> structure. The PMC would reserve the right to prevent "destructive" choices,
> but I can't see how poor mailing list organization could truly be labelled
> as destructive :-)
>
> As a matter of fact, I'm recording these votes right now in the STATUS
> document. In there, I'd consider the organizational aspects to be voted on
> by the affected community. However, I believe the PMC has the only binding
> votes for the charter (what is a "proper" component to be managed by this
> Project); you may note that I listed 'mas' as non-binding for one of the
> votes.
>
Shall I just submit a patch with my name all over it then?
--
Scott Sanders - sanders@apache.org
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
> <chair hat="on">
>
> no. at the moment, only the pmc votes are binding. others are
> advisory/indicative, will most probably be followed if they appear
> objects, and certainly won't be ignored in any event, but i'm not
s/objects/objective/
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> IMO, all the participants on this list are casting binding votes for the
> structure.
<chair hat="on">
no. at the moment, only the pmc votes are binding. others are
advisory/indicative, will most probably be followed if they appear
objects, and certainly won't be ignored in any event, but i'm not
going to permit this to start off with any particular group being
able to landslide any issues just by virtue of having more people.
</chair>
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
IMO, all the participants on this list are casting binding votes for the
structure. The PMC would reserve the right to prevent "destructive" choices,
but I can't see how poor mailing list organization could truly be labelled
as destructive :-)
As a matter of fact, I'm recording these votes right now in the STATUS
document. In there, I'd consider the organizational aspects to be voted on
by the affected community. However, I believe the PMC has the only binding
votes for the charter (what is a "proper" component to be managed by this
Project); you may note that I listed 'mas' as non-binding for one of the
votes.
Cheers,
-g
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 11:36:48PM +0100, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> BTW: Whose votes are binding? or is this just indicative?
> Stephen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Stein" <gs...@lyra.org>
> To: <ge...@commons.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 11:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE: commons lists]
>
>
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 05:15:10PM -0500, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > >
> > > [Somebody forgot to change the subject. Tsk. Tsk. :-) ]
> > >
> > > > [X] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
> > > > [ ] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
> > > > [ ] Per-language mailing lists
> > > > [ ] ____________________________________________
> > >
> > > The incubator PMC is going to have to keep an eye on things in the
> > > main list and help breakout as necessary.
> >
> > s/incubator/commons/ I presume?
> >
> > And my vote:
> >
> > [X] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -g
> >
> > --
> > Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@commons.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@commons.apache.org
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net>.
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 00:36, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > >
> > > > [X] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
> > > > [ ] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
> > > > [ ] Per-language mailing lists
> > > > [ ] ____________________________________________
> > >
My vote too..
Mvgr,
Martin
Re: [VOTE: commons lists] - Bindingness?
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
BTW: Whose votes are binding? or is this just indicative?
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Stein" <gs...@lyra.org>
To: <ge...@commons.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE: commons lists]
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 05:15:10PM -0500, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> >
> > [Somebody forgot to change the subject. Tsk. Tsk. :-) ]
> >
> > > [X] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
> > > [ ] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
> > > [ ] Per-language mailing lists
> > > [ ] ____________________________________________
> >
> > The incubator PMC is going to have to keep an eye on things in the
> > main list and help breakout as necessary.
>
> s/incubator/commons/ I presume?
>
> And my vote:
>
> [X] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
>
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> --
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@commons.apache.org
>
Re: [VOTE: commons lists]
Posted by robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 09:12 AM, Sander Striker wrote:
> [ ] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
> [X] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
the only way that the jakarta-commons dev mailing list can function is
through the 'prefix rule' that is, all posts should be prefixed. in the
jakarta-commons we have well-established components all of which are peers.
so, you prefix with the component name eg. 'subject: [digester] how about
a new release?'.
it would not be possible to cope with the traffic with this rule. (indeed,
i don't think that i'll be able to cope with the traffic on this list for
much longer without being able to filter on subject prefix.)
i'd like to suggest this rule is adopted here with a slight variation. we
try concept prefixes (as well as component ones). breakouts from the
commons-dev happen because it's easy to spot which components are
generating a lot of traffic. when a component becomes too popular, it's
moved to it's own list. but this also ensures that this list will be
successful since it'll have a critical mass of email posts.
prefixing is a more flexible approach than simply creating concept based
mailing lists. popular concepts would be easy to identify and new concepts
would be easy to create. of course, we'd need a list of official concepts
but that'd be easier to maintain than physical mailing lists.
if we do go down the concept-based approach, i'd also like to see
components broken out with their concepts. so if [http client] concept
becomes to popular for the mother list, then components closely associated
with the concept should be broken out as well.
- robert
RE: [VOTE: commons lists]
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
[ ] One mother general@ list, with specific breakouts when needed
[X] Per-concept mailing lists (define "concept" however)
[ ] Per-language mailing lists
[ ] ____________________________________________
Sander