You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com> on 2003/01/04 02:00:28 UTC
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
I've subscribed to the incubator list. I was just going to ask you about
progress.
My concern is CVS.
Do we start clean, or do we transfer our CVS repository from SourceForge to
Jakarta?
SourceForge prepares a nightly .tar of the repository.
Currently, we are progressing on three fronts. The CVS HEAD branch has 2.3,
which really should shift over to a beta release soon.
I've got a huge number of changes in the hship-2-3 branch, and Mind Bridge
has his set of changes in his branch. There have been commits to the HEAD
since I made my branch; it won't be difficult to synchronize my changes back
into the SF CVS repository, but if we shift repositories it'll be a
nightmare.
Ideally, we would freeze development on Tapestry long enough to get a clean
repository download from SF, then install it on Jakarta and maintain history
and integrity.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>; "Tapestry Contrib"
<ta...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 4:42 PM
Subject: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
> > Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> >
> >> Status?
> >
> >
> > in part, waiting for me to commit my edits to the web site.
> > also waiting for (but not blocking on) sam ruby's response
> > from jakarta.
> >
> > let's see. howard, are you here? probably the first things
> > to do would be mailing lists and a cvs module into which
> > the code can be transferred. anyone think of an earlier
> > step than that?
>
> It would be preferrable if the Tapestry committers subscribed to this
> list at this time. (general-subscribe@incubator.apache.org)
>
> Those things are listed in the proposal.
> (http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?TapestryProposal).
> "
>
> [3] identify the Jakarta resources to be created
>
> [3.1] mailing lists(s)
>
> tapestry-user tapestry-dev tapestry-cvs
>
> [3.2] CVS repositories
>
> jakarta-tapestry
>
> [3.3] Bugzilla
>
> framework - tapestry components - web site, contrib library,
> documentation, examples
>
> [3.4] Wiki
>
> "
>
> It might be good if there was a public incubator module that I and later
> the Tapestry Committers could check such things into (as the proposal is
> IMHO in a post-wiki stage).
>
> Do you feel moving the mailing lists is in the best interests of the
> Tapestry community and the
> community proper? Or should that perhaps wait until a presupposed move
> to Jakarta.
>
> Possible Disadvantages (assuming migration to jakarta):
> requiring people to unsubscribe (or not) from sourceforge mail lists,
> subscribe to apache-incubator mail lists, then subscribe to the jakarta
> ones later is kinda rough.
>
> The website also has some of the same issues (and add google to that,
> broken links for anyone referring to Tapestry and sourceforge doesn't
> like to delete things)...
> Though we could possibly handle that through configuration (I think)
> later on by autoredirecting from incubator.apache.org/tapestry/*
> jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/* via httpd config.
>
> The CVS module does not have the same issue (there is only one
repository).
>
> What are your thoughts on these matters?
>
> thanks,
>
> -Andy
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Tapestry-contrib mailing list
> Tapestry-contrib@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-contrib
>
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 07:32 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Ok, then why do we keep Tomcat? Why HTTPD itself? They have a viable
> community and thus little need for the ASF.
That's easy:
1) They are owned by the ASF
2) ASF members continue to work on them.
[...]
> So let's say JBoss wanted to join ASF? You'd say no because it's too
> big?
haha! Isn't that exactly what happened? And look at where JBoss is now!
-aaron
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 11:41:16AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Sunday, January 5, 2003 4:32 PM +0100 Nicola Ken Barozzi
> <ni...@apache.org> wrote:
>...
> > You sound like they want to come in to suck our blood. Totally
> > defensive. Can't *we* leverage *their* community/code/vision? Are
> > we so perfect that they can only suck our blood?
>
> No. But, I feel that we do not have the resources to accept every
> project that comes our way. Therefore, I think there has to be a
> compelling reason to accept a particular project into the ASF. As I
> said, I have yet to see one made for Tapestry.
The Jakarta PMC said there was a compelling reason. They "saw one" an made a
decision. That's enough, so deal with it :-)
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> If Tomcat were proposed as a project, yes, it'd be too large.
>
>> So let's say JBoss wanted to join ASF? You'd say no because it's
>> too big?
>>
>> *sigh*
>
>
> At one point the JBoss team *was* interested in joining the ASF, but was
> rejected because it was too big. Exactly. -- justin
>
How interesting I was told it was because they wanted to join like the
week jakarta was formed and wanted to stay LGPL'd. However, who
believes mail archives anyhow.
-Andy
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re:
Tapestry?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Sunday, January 5, 2003 4:32 PM +0100 Nicola Ken Barozzi
<ni...@apache.org> wrote:
> Ok, then why do we keep Tomcat? Why HTTPD itself? They have a
> viable community and thus little need for the ASF.
>
> Or they just have the luck that ASF had them when they were poor
> ans small? :->
Indeed. We helped them grow. Part of our responsibility is to keep
them as they mature. We should be responsible for the projects that
we accept. We will not orphan projects as they grow.
> You sound like they want to come in to suck our blood. Totally
> defensive. Can't *we* leverage *their* community/code/vision? Are
> we so perfect that they can only suck our blood?
No. But, I feel that we do not have the resources to accept every
project that comes our way. Therefore, I think there has to be a
compelling reason to accept a particular project into the ASF. As I
said, I have yet to see one made for Tapestry.
> What is the ASF mission? Form new communities?
> Then why has Jakarta not accepted projects that do *not* have a
> stable community?
That's probably because they lacked oversight from the foundation.
Perhaps that isn't the case any longer.
> What is, then? What? Some poor developers with a nice idea and in
> need of help? I'm getting nervous, because I think, yes I do, that
> we're insulting Tapestry developers. And for that I apologise.
I'm not trying to insult the tapestry developers. I'm saying that
they already have a community built around it. What can they hope to
gain by joining us? Those benefits seem minimal.
> That's your opinion of course. So that means we should get only
> code dumps from companies and some poor developers with some lines
> of code, interesting ideas and a bag of hope?
>
> Come on....
How are we furthering our mission? This is how I see it.
> Tapestry is not of quality? It's too large? How large is too much,
> let's say as Tomcat?
If Tomcat were proposed as a project, yes, it'd be too large.
> So let's say JBoss wanted to join ASF? You'd say no because it's
> too big?
>
> *sigh*
At one point the JBoss team *was* interested in joining the ASF, but
was rejected because it was too big. Exactly. -- justin
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Sander Striker wrote:
> The question of what the ASF gains from 'adopting' Tapestry is an
> entirely different matter. Asking Tapestry to answer that would
> be insulting IMO. And I presume that the Jakarta PMC answered this
> question for themselves several months ago, when Tapestry first
> applied for adoption.
Peace, love and unity :)
Seriously: what _can_ a volunteer organisation based around open source
software and community gain from a new codebase & group of volunteers
being added, willing to work within the same spirit?
Nothing & everything.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
RE: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:nicolaken@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 4:32 PM
[...]
>> About the only thing that they can leverage is either our
>> infrastructure and brand name.
>
> You sound like they want to come in to suck our blood. Totally
> defensive. Can't *we* leverage *their* community/code/vision? Are we so
> perfect that they can only suck our blood?
Absolutely not. But the thing is that the question was what Tapestry
thought it would gain from becoming an ASF project. I personally
find that an interesting question.
The question of what the ASF gains from 'adopting' Tapestry is an
entirely different matter. Asking Tapestry to answer that would
be insulting IMO. And I presume that the Jakarta PMC answered this
question for themselves several months ago, when Tapestry first
applied for adoption.
[...]
>> My point is that our infrastructure and brand name can't be the reason
>> for joining the ASF.
I certainly can be. It would be unhealthy for the ASF if that were the only
reasons for projects wanting to join though.
Sander
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:01 PM +1100 Conor MacNeill
> <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au> wrote:
[...]
>> What would be the compelling reason that you would see for the ASF
>> to accept any project? If Tapestry does not satisfy these
>> requirements, then what sort of project would, IYHO, meet them?
>> IOW, can the incubator function at all?
>
> I believe the incubator should be about nuturing new communities.
> Projects that already have a viable community have little need for the
> ASF.
Ok, then why do we keep Tomcat? Why HTTPD itself? They have a viable
community and thus little need for the ASF.
Or they just have the luck that ASF had them when they were poor ans
small? :->
> About the only thing that they can leverage is either our
> infrastructure and brand name.
You sound like they want to come in to suck our blood. Totally
defensive. Can't *we* leverage *their* community/code/vision? Are we so
perfect that they can only suck our blood?
> Those are things I do not want us to
> allow just any project to use - we can't be SourceForge - we'd
> collapse. I'd rather us restrict our limited resources to helping new
> communities to form rather than helping already established
> communities. I think there's a critical mass that every project needs
> to achieve to be self-sustaining. Projects need help achieving that.
What is the ASF mission? Form new communities?
Then why has Jakarta not accepted projects that do *not* have a stable
community?
> My point is that our infrastructure and brand name can't be the reason
> for joining the ASF.
What is, then? What? Some poor developers with a nice idea and in need
of help? I'm getting nervous, because I think, yes I do, that we're
insulting Tapestry developers. And for that I apologise.
> Tapestry already seems to have a community and
> several major releases. A new project that is just starting out might
> only have one or two interested people and perhaps a little bit of
> code. Or, it might be a company looking to build a community off
> donated code (see Tomcat, Ant). Those are the types of things I'd
> rather see the ASF pursue. I'm not terribly interested in importing
> medium-or-large size communities.
That's your opinion of course. So that means we should get only code
dumps from companies and some poor developers with some lines of code,
interesting ideas and a bag of hope?
Come on....
> Quality over quantity. Smaller rather than larger.
Tapestry is not of quality? It's too large? How large is too much, let's
say as Tomcat?
So let's say JBoss wanted to join ASF? You'd say no because it's too big?
*sigh*
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: ASF Benefits (was Re: Role of incubator)
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> g/Fame/s//Visibility/g
>
> Visibility = when google pays attention to you.
Better start a weblog than an Apache project then.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: ASF Benefits (was Re: Role of incubator)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 11:43 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>> g/Fame/s//Visibility/g
>>
>> Visibility = when google pays attention to you.
>
>
> Aren't those two different (but closely related) things?
>
At one time. Yes. Now? I'm not sure ;-)
> (Consider both added to the list :)
>
> -aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: ASF Benefits (was Re: Role of incubator)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 11:43 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> g/Fame/s//Visibility/g
>
> Visibility = when google pays attention to you.
Aren't those two different (but closely related) things?
(Consider both added to the list :)
-aaron
Re: ASF Benefits (was Re: Role of incubator)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
g/Fame/s//Visibility/g
Visibility = when google pays attention to you.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> Hmm..This thread got me thinking.
>
> Why don't we make a list of all the things that projects
> can get from the ASF, or from being part of the ASF. I
> bet it would be much easier to make this list than, say,
> to try and write down what the Apache Way is.
>
>
> I'll start, feel free to add:
>
>
> - Projects outlive individual contributors
> - Community fostering
> - Infrastructure
> - mailing lists
> - bugzilla
> - webspace
> - cvs
> - development platforms
> - Entity ownership (legal oversight)
> - Apache Branding (aka Fame)
> ...
>
>
> I'm sure there are many more, for better or for worse,
> intended or not.
>
> -aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
ASF Benefits (was Re: Role of incubator)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
Hmm..This thread got me thinking.
Why don't we make a list of all the things that projects
can get from the ASF, or from being part of the ASF. I
bet it would be much easier to make this list than, say,
to try and write down what the Apache Way is.
I'll start, feel free to add:
- Projects outlive individual contributors
- Community fostering
- Infrastructure
- mailing lists
- bugzilla
- webspace
- cvs
- development platforms
- Entity ownership (legal oversight)
- Apache Branding (aka Fame)
...
I'm sure there are many more, for better or for worse,
intended or not.
-aaron
legal protection (was: Role of incubator)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:03:43AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>...
> For example, I believe that Tomcat should certainly have its own PMC.
> There is no reason to believe that the Tomcat committers themselves
> can't be legally responsible for the project and its management. In
> fact, IIRC, according to Roy, only actions by PMC members will be
> protected by the ASF. Actions by committers may not be protected.
> Therefore, under this interpretation, the bulk of the Jakarta
> participants aren't covered by the protection of the ASF. How many
> people involved in Jakarta projects realize this? (It was brought up
> on the reorg@ list and it didn't seem to matter to some.)
Actually, the ASF is required to provide protection *only* to the following
people: directors, officers, and members. That definitely leaves out
committers, and it even leaves out PMC members who aren't members or the
Chair. The ASF will certainly try to assist the PMC members, but is
(actually) not obligated to do so.
IOW, we'll do what we can to protect the code and some of the people, but if
you want to shift any personal legal liability to the ASF, then your goal is
to become a member.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
thank you for that note, howard. that cleared things up considerably for
me.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 06:44 AM, Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
> This sounds very Kafka to me ... your statement is that if a
> technology is
> in good shape (mature, has a community), then it shouldn't be added to
> Apache/Jakarta/Incubator because there's no benefit. However, from
> personal
> experience, I know that an unknown but promising project without a
> community
> (say, Tapestry in March 2000 -- check the e-mail achives) is very
> much NOT
> welcome to Jakarta.
It is almost impossible for the ASF to present a unified front,
so you can see where many of these inconsistencies come from.
[...]
> I'm alsop beginning to see what Sam Ruby was mentioning about "on my
> turf".
> We seem to be having variations of the same discussion again and
> again, in
> new places.
The incubator is new ground for everyone here, you included. You can
have
just as much of an impact on how this process goes as the next person.
-aaron
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
This sounds very Kafka to me ... your statement is that if a technology is
in good shape (mature, has a community), then it shouldn't be added to
Apache/Jakarta/Incubator because there's no benefit. However, from personal
experience, I know that an unknown but promising project without a community
(say, Tapestry in March 2000 -- check the e-mail achives) is very much NOT
welcome to Jakarta.
I suppose there's a third option ... become a "journeyman committer" on
other Jakarta projects until you have the political backing to bypass this
Catch-22 filter. My free time has been completely consumed by Tapestry for
three years, and the framework reflects that, so that was not a viable
option for me.
Here's the Jakarta mission:
Jakarta is a Project of the Apache Software Foundation, charged with the
creation and maintenance of commercial-quality, open-source, server-side
solutions for the Java Platform, based on software licensed to the
Foundation, for distribution at no charge to the public.
Nothing there that says projects must start with Jakarta, and many of the
important ones did not (BSF, ORO, Log4J and others whose history I don't
know).
Tapestry is definately commericial quality (or better) and open-source.
Apache does have a better infrastructure than SourceForge, but primarily
offers Tapestry brand-recognition. This is very important; on SF it's
impossible to stand out from 20,000 other projects. Moving Tapestry to
Jakarta means passing a technology/meritocracy filter. Don't squander that
... it would survive, even if every Jakarta developer died of food poisoning
at JakartaCon2003.
What does Jakarta "get" from hosting Tapestry? What does it get from
hosting ORO, Struts or Log4J? It helps Jakarta with its mission statement,
by reinforcing the power of the Jakarta brand ... by delivering more
commercial-quality open-source server-side solutions. Its a bit of a
feedback cycle, that works as long as the software is of high quality.
I'm alsop beginning to see what Sam Ruby was mentioning about "on my turf".
We seem to be having variations of the same discussion again and again, in
new places.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <je...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 7:03 AM
Subject: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> --On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:01 PM +1100 Conor MacNeill
> <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au> wrote:
>
> > What problems do you see that Jakarta has managing what it has?
> > BTW, this is a genuine question, not flamebait. I have seen this
> > statement repeated often and would like to understand its basis.
>
> *sigh*
>
> The ability of the Jakarta PMC to maintain oversight of its
> constituent projects. Sam has stated that the Jakarta PMC takes a
> reactionary response to issues rather than a proactive response
> because it can't keep up. I believe that is contrary to the original
> intentions of the PMC structure, and indicates a flaw in the model
> used by Jakarta's PMC.
>
> I believe this is partly because there isn't adequate representation
> in the PMC by all of its projects. One of the key tenets to the ASF
> model is the meritocracy. The Jakarta PMC, as a popularly elected
> body, isn't based on merit.
>
> The management structure needs to be localized near the people doing
> the work - i.e. the code itself. This allows active oversight to be
> maintained. The people doing the work get to have a say in the
> management. This is what makes them aware of how the ASF works.
> (Why aren't more people from Jakarta subprojects members of the ASF?)
>
> For example, I believe that Tomcat should certainly have its own PMC.
> There is no reason to believe that the Tomcat committers themselves
> can't be legally responsible for the project and its management. In
> fact, IIRC, according to Roy, only actions by PMC members will be
> protected by the ASF. Actions by committers may not be protected.
> Therefore, under this interpretation, the bulk of the Jakarta
> participants aren't covered by the protection of the ASF. How many
> people involved in Jakarta projects realize this? (It was brought up
> on the reorg@ list and it didn't seem to matter to some.)
>
> > What would be the compelling reason that you would see for the ASF
> > to accept any project? If Tapestry does not satisfy these
> > requirements, then what sort of project would, IYHO, meet them?
> > IOW, can the incubator function at all?
>
> I believe the incubator should be about nuturing new communities.
> Projects that already have a viable community have little need for
> the ASF. About the only thing that they can leverage is either our
> infrastructure and brand name. Those are things I do not want us to
> allow just any project to use - we can't be SourceForge - we'd
> collapse. I'd rather us restrict our limited resources to helping
> new communities to form rather than helping already established
> communities. I think there's a critical mass that every project
> needs to achieve to be self-sustaining. Projects need help achieving
> that.
>
> My point is that our infrastructure and brand name can't be the
> reason for joining the ASF. Tapestry already seems to have a
> community and several major releases. A new project that is just
> starting out might only have one or two interested people and perhaps
> a little bit of code. Or, it might be a company looking to build a
> community off donated code (see Tomcat, Ant). Those are the types of
> things I'd rather see the ASF pursue. I'm not terribly interested in
> importing medium-or-large size communities.
>
> Quality over quantity. Smaller rather than larger.
>
> > In this case I think the incubator is for the incubation of the
> > Apache Way of doing things in an existing project and its
> > participants. The resolution that formed the incubator states:
> >
> > RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC be and hereby is
> > responsible for the acceptance and oversight of new products
> > submitted or proposed to become part of the Foundation;
>
> I'm not really sure what you mean by this. Yeah, the incubator gets
> to decide what the ASF takes in...
>
> > Isn't the incubator supposed to decide exactly that question? One
>
> Well, yes, and that's why we're having this conversation on the
> incubator list not on a wiki.
>
> > of the problems with the incubator is when the ultimate answer is
> > "No", what then for a project such as Tapestry that has undergone
> > such changes? I'd like to see some discussion around that, for I
> > feel it may be very difficult to say No after acceptance into the
> > Incubator.
>
> Obviously, I'm favoring a much flatter organizational model. In
> fact, it's so flat that almost every project we'd incubate would have
> its own PMC. There isn't another PMC that would have to approve it
> when it leaves the incubator. The incubator PMC is responsible for
> the oversight of these new PMCs. My hunch is that the incubator PMC
> would judge when it reaches that critical mass of participation and
> then withdraw from any involvement and do the promotion. If it
> determines that it will never reach the critical mass, it'll shut the
> PMC down or just leave it in the incubator.
>
> That's my take on the incubator and its role. -- justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Trust WAS Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
> As Avalon amply demonstrated, being a subproject of Jakarta today does
> not preclude becoming an ASF project down the road.
>
> What is important (to me, at least) is:
>
> (1) No coersion has ever been placed on the tapestry folks towards
> Jakarta as a home.
Here is what I did: I asked them "What do you want to be" -- and
explained the implications as best as I understood them at the time
(which admitedly might not have been fully) and at the time
Avalon was a Jakarta project and nothing more.
* Your address would be: "tapestry.apache.org" instead of
jakarta.apache.org/tapestry
* You'd be directly accountable to the board instead of the Jakarta PMC
* You'd have your own PMC
They said they'd like to be a jakarta project. I think MAINLY for the
link on the Jakarta page and the venerable (outside the Apache developer
community) Jakarta "brand".
They are now aware that they could have their cake and eat it too.
Guys if you wish to make your preference known, signify it now.
>
> (2) The tapestry folks are well aware of their options.
yes.
>
> (3) As indicated above, any decision made now is mutable.
yes.
>
> And, orthogonal to the above, I recognize that this increases the need
> for me to address the underlying oversight issues that continue to
> exist within Jakarta.
Here is how I would suggest handling it in regard to the Tapestry issue
supposing it is just a Jakarta project.
Sam. I will monitor the project and tell the Jakarta PMC when/if there
are ever any issues that I think require oversite, if I'm ever unable to
perform this duty I will find someone who will. If I do not get a
response from the Jakarta PMC I will send mail to members and the board.
If you *trust* me to do this and *trust* my word on this, then the
issue is addressed in regards to the tapestry project. I have a perfect
track record in this regard.
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>.
At 10:04 AM -0500 1/6/03, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>As Avalon amply demonstrated, being a subproject of Jakarta today does not preclude becoming an ASF project down the road.
>
>What is important (to me, at least) is:
>
>(1) No coersion has ever been placed on the tapestry folks towards Jakarta as a home.
>
>(2) The tapestry folks are well aware of their options.
>
>(3) As indicated above, any decision made now is mutable.
>
>And, orthogonal to the above, I recognize that this increases the need for me to address the underlying oversight issues that continue to exist within Jakarta.
>
Agreed. So I'm assuming that we are progressing under the assumption
of a Jakarta subproject. Post incubation, it's up to Tapestry what they
want (unless they want to propose, right now, that they'd prefer
being an "ASF project" directly, which I have not heard at all).
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
Tapestry / Jakarta (was: Role of incubator)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 10:04:57AM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >
> > I think that Tapestry is a complex and large enough scoped project to
> > warrant it being its "own" ASF project, ala Avalon, and not a subproject
> > of Jakarta. However, the working assumption up to now has been that
> > the graduation path was towards Jakarta.
>
> As Avalon amply demonstrated, being a subproject of Jakarta today does
> not preclude becoming an ASF project down the road.
Quite true. And Ant as well.
>...
> (2) The tapestry folks are well aware of their options.
I'm not sure that I believe that. It would appear there is some confusion
between being "part of the Apache Jakarta branding / site presence" and
"managed by the Jakarta PMC". Avalon maintains its site under jakarta, and
Ant is under jakarta and at ant.apache.org, yet each has their own PMC.
Personally, I'd prefer to see Tapestry get its own PMC on exit.
> (3) As indicated above, any decision made now is mutable.
Yah.
> And, orthogonal to the above, I recognize that this increases the need
> for me to address the underlying oversight issues that continue to exist
> within Jakarta.
Easiest way is to stop trying and do more spawning. Turn Jakarta into the
"Apache Jakarta" brand rather than an organizational mechanism.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I think that Tapestry is a complex and large enough scoped project to
> warrant it being its "own" ASF project, ala Avalon, and not a subproject
> of Jakarta. However, the working assumption up to now has been that
> the graduation path was towards Jakarta.
As Avalon amply demonstrated, being a subproject of Jakarta today does
not preclude becoming an ASF project down the road.
What is important (to me, at least) is:
(1) No coersion has ever been placed on the tapestry folks towards
Jakarta as a home.
(2) The tapestry folks are well aware of their options.
(3) As indicated above, any decision made now is mutable.
And, orthogonal to the above, I recognize that this increases the need
for me to address the underlying oversight issues that continue to exist
within Jakarta.
- Sam Ruby
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>At 2:46 PM -0500 1/5/03, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>
>>I think this will depend on the precariousness of the political process more than anything else. I have no objection.
>>
>>
>>
>
>I think that Tapestry is a complex and large enough scoped project to
>warrant it being its "own" ASF project, ala Avalon, and not a subproject
>of Jakarta. However, the working assumption up to now has been that
>the graduation path was towards Jakarta.
>
>
Doesn't matter to me (and I highly doubt to them) so long as they're
linked from the page with the rest of the Java stuff.
Thanks,
-Andy
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>.
At 2:46 PM -0500 1/5/03, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>I think this will depend on the precariousness of the political process more than anything else. I have no objection.
>
I think that Tapestry is a complex and large enough scoped project to
warrant it being its "own" ASF project, ala Avalon, and not a subproject
of Jakarta. However, the working assumption up to now has been that
the graduation path was towards Jakarta.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 06:08 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>> I'm a bit confused by this. There is no reason Tapestry can't be a
>> Jakarta project and have a PMC. There are Jakarta projects that
>> function that way now. (Avalon I believe?)
>
>
> To be honest, I'm more comfortable at this time with Tapestry
> being its own top-level project w/ PMC than being a subproject
> of Jakarta. Then again, that's probably because I have very
> little visibility into the Jakarta mega-hierarchy but I do
> know a little how other top-level PMCs work (and I consider
> most of those to be healthy).
>
I think this will depend on the precariousness of the political process
more than anything else. I have no objection.
-Andy
> -aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 06:08 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> I'm a bit confused by this. There is no reason Tapestry can't be a
> Jakarta project and have a PMC. There are Jakarta projects that
> function that way now. (Avalon I believe?)
To be honest, I'm more comfortable at this time with Tapestry
being its own top-level project w/ PMC than being a subproject
of Jakarta. Then again, that's probably because I have very
little visibility into the Jakarta mega-hierarchy but I do
know a little how other top-level PMCs work (and I consider
most of those to be healthy).
-aaron
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re:
Tapestry?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:19 AM -0500 "Howard M. Lewis Ship"
<hl...@attbi.com> wrote:
> I also think the synnergy will be easier to manager within Jakarta.
> For example, there is a bit of code in Tapestry that is not
> Tapestry specific that could move into the commons, into
> commons-lang perhaps.
My point is that this could happen without Tapestry being an ASF
project. -- justin
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
Please define what you* mean by synergy.
*I'll pose the same question to anyone else who
has used that word in regards to Tapestry on this list.
-aaron
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 07:19 AM, Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
> Top level vs. Jakarta.
>
> Jakarta is "server side Java". Apache is less well defined.
>
> I also think the synnergy will be easier to manager within Jakarta.
> For
> example, there is a bit of code in Tapestry that is not Tapestry
> specific
> that could move into the commons, into commons-lang perhaps.
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
Top level vs. Jakarta.
Jakarta is "server side Java". Apache is less well defined.
I also think the synnergy will be easier to manager within Jakarta. For
example, there is a bit of code in Tapestry that is not Tapestry specific
that could move into the commons, into commons-lang perhaps.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> >
> > Both Avalon and Ant are now sister ASF projects of Jakarta - of equal
> > stature in the eyes of the ASF. The Jakarta PMC is no longer
> > accountable for their actions.
> >
>
> Thanks for clearing that up. I think I get it now.
>
> >> I thought this "reorganization" was going to be voluntary. This
message
> >> does not sound that way.
> >
> >
> > I personally would welcome Tapestry as *either* a top level project or a
> > Jakarta subproject.
> >
>
> Yeah either is fine. I think Tapestry mainly prefers to be on Jakarta
> rather than top level because "thats where all the Java projects are".
> The rest is irellevant to me. I'm game for either. (this is not to
> say its not important, just not to me)
>
> -Andy
>
> > - Sam Ruby
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> Both Avalon and Ant are now sister ASF projects of Jakarta - of equal
> stature in the eyes of the ASF. The Jakarta PMC is no longer
> accountable for their actions.
>
Thanks for clearing that up. I think I get it now.
>> I thought this "reorganization" was going to be voluntary. This message
>> does not sound that way.
>
>
> I personally would welcome Tapestry as *either* a top level project or a
> Jakarta subproject.
>
Yeah either is fine. I think Tapestry mainly prefers to be on Jakarta
rather than top level because "thats where all the Java projects are".
The rest is irellevant to me. I'm game for either. (this is not to
say its not important, just not to me)
-Andy
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> I'm a bit confused by this. There is no reason Tapestry can't be a
> Jakarta project and have a PMC. There are Jakarta projects that
> function that way now. (Avalon I believe?)
Both Avalon and Ant are now sister ASF projects of Jakarta - of equal
stature in the eyes of the ASF. The Jakarta PMC is no longer
accountable for their actions.
> I thought this "reorganization" was going to be voluntary. This message
> does not sound that way.
I personally would welcome Tapestry as *either* a top level project or a
Jakarta subproject.
- Sam Ruby
Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:01 PM +1100 Conor MacNeill
> <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au> wrote:
>
>> What problems do you see that Jakarta has managing what it has?
>> BTW, this is a genuine question, not flamebait. I have seen this
>> statement repeated often and would like to understand its basis.
>
>
> *sigh*
>
<snip reason="long"/>
I'm a bit confused by this. There is no reason Tapestry can't be a
Jakarta project and have a PMC. There are Jakarta projects that
function that way now. (Avalon I believe?)
I thought this "reorganization" was going to be voluntary. This message
does not sound that way.
I feel many of the guidelines being used so far seem to be
self-contradictory.
I'd like to hear "what is the perfect project and reasons for joining"
currently I'm not seeing a way *any* project could join.
-Andy
Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:01 PM +1100 Conor MacNeill
<co...@cortexebusiness.com.au> wrote:
> What problems do you see that Jakarta has managing what it has?
> BTW, this is a genuine question, not flamebait. I have seen this
> statement repeated often and would like to understand its basis.
*sigh*
The ability of the Jakarta PMC to maintain oversight of its
constituent projects. Sam has stated that the Jakarta PMC takes a
reactionary response to issues rather than a proactive response
because it can't keep up. I believe that is contrary to the original
intentions of the PMC structure, and indicates a flaw in the model
used by Jakarta's PMC.
I believe this is partly because there isn't adequate representation
in the PMC by all of its projects. One of the key tenets to the ASF
model is the meritocracy. The Jakarta PMC, as a popularly elected
body, isn't based on merit.
The management structure needs to be localized near the people doing
the work - i.e. the code itself. This allows active oversight to be
maintained. The people doing the work get to have a say in the
management. This is what makes them aware of how the ASF works.
(Why aren't more people from Jakarta subprojects members of the ASF?)
For example, I believe that Tomcat should certainly have its own PMC.
There is no reason to believe that the Tomcat committers themselves
can't be legally responsible for the project and its management. In
fact, IIRC, according to Roy, only actions by PMC members will be
protected by the ASF. Actions by committers may not be protected.
Therefore, under this interpretation, the bulk of the Jakarta
participants aren't covered by the protection of the ASF. How many
people involved in Jakarta projects realize this? (It was brought up
on the reorg@ list and it didn't seem to matter to some.)
> What would be the compelling reason that you would see for the ASF
> to accept any project? If Tapestry does not satisfy these
> requirements, then what sort of project would, IYHO, meet them?
> IOW, can the incubator function at all?
I believe the incubator should be about nuturing new communities.
Projects that already have a viable community have little need for
the ASF. About the only thing that they can leverage is either our
infrastructure and brand name. Those are things I do not want us to
allow just any project to use - we can't be SourceForge - we'd
collapse. I'd rather us restrict our limited resources to helping
new communities to form rather than helping already established
communities. I think there's a critical mass that every project
needs to achieve to be self-sustaining. Projects need help achieving
that.
My point is that our infrastructure and brand name can't be the
reason for joining the ASF. Tapestry already seems to have a
community and several major releases. A new project that is just
starting out might only have one or two interested people and perhaps
a little bit of code. Or, it might be a company looking to build a
community off donated code (see Tomcat, Ant). Those are the types of
things I'd rather see the ASF pursue. I'm not terribly interested in
importing medium-or-large size communities.
Quality over quantity. Smaller rather than larger.
> In this case I think the incubator is for the incubation of the
> Apache Way of doing things in an existing project and its
> participants. The resolution that formed the incubator states:
>
> RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC be and hereby is
> responsible for the acceptance and oversight of new products
> submitted or proposed to become part of the Foundation;
I'm not really sure what you mean by this. Yeah, the incubator gets
to decide what the ASF takes in...
> Isn't the incubator supposed to decide exactly that question? One
Well, yes, and that's why we're having this conversation on the
incubator list not on a wiki.
> of the problems with the incubator is when the ultimate answer is
> "No", what then for a project such as Tapestry that has undergone
> such changes? I'd like to see some discussion around that, for I
> feel it may be very difficult to say No after acceptance into the
> Incubator.
Obviously, I'm favoring a much flatter organizational model. In
fact, it's so flat that almost every project we'd incubate would have
its own PMC. There isn't another PMC that would have to approve it
when it leaves the incubator. The incubator PMC is responsible for
the oversight of these new PMCs. My hunch is that the incubator PMC
would judge when it reaches that critical mass of participation and
then withdraw from any involvement and do the promotion. If it
determines that it will never reach the critical mass, it'll shut the
PMC down or just leave it in the incubator.
That's my take on the incubator and its role. -- justin
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
> Isn't the incubator supposed to decide exactly that question? One of the
> problems with the incubator is when the ultimate answer is "No", what
> then for a project such as Tapestry that has undergone such changes? I'd
> like to see some discussion around that, for I feel it may be very
> difficult to say No after acceptance into the Incubator.
>
+1
> Conor
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: oversight (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Greg Stein wrote:
>
>>What problems do you see that Jakarta has managing what it has? BTW, this is
>>a genuine question, not flamebait. I have seen this statement repeated often
>>and would like to understand its basis.
>
> The Jakarta PMC is *way* overburdened. Any notion that they are truly
> monitoring *all* of Jakarta is right out the window. This is immediately
> obvious at the Board level when we get a one-sentence report at the Board
> meeting about the state of Jakarta (see the November 2002 minutes).
I answered this before. Now I will answer it here.
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news/index.html
Now I'm off to go nominate everyone who has consistently contributed to
writing the newsletter as PMC members. ;-)
- Sam Ruby
P.S. Greg, I very much appreciate your style. Wait until pretty much
everything that can be said has been (which is generally long before the
conversation actually stops), and then give everyone equal measures of
of a kick in the behind. +1
oversight (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 10:01:54PM +1100, Conor MacNeill wrote:
> Justin,
>
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > whatever). Why should the Jakarta project increase their management
> > burden when they already have problems managing what they have?
> >
>
> What problems do you see that Jakarta has managing what it has? BTW, this is
> a genuine question, not flamebait. I have seen this statement repeated often
> and would like to understand its basis.
The Jakarta PMC is *way* overburdened. Any notion that they are truly
monitoring *all* of Jakarta is right out the window. This is immediately
obvious at the Board level when we get a one-sentence report at the Board
meeting about the state of Jakarta (see the November 2002 minutes).
>...
> Isn't the incubator supposed to decide exactly that question? One of the
> problems with the incubator is when the ultimate answer is "No", what then
> for a project such as Tapestry that has undergone such changes? I'd like to
> see some discussion around that, for I feel it may be very difficult to say
> No after acceptance into the Incubator.
Actually, an interesting response to this would be: every project coming out
the Incubator gets its own PMC. That solves the oversight problem, and it
solves the question of "what if the PMC later decides it doesn't want the
code?"
Presumably, the project entered the Incubator based on another PMC's request
or based on the Incubator itself deciding to accept it. The exit rule for
the incubator is, effectively, a self-sustaining community. Wrapping a PMC
around that is no big deal (because, really, the PMC simply equals the
active committers that have been "in the incubator").
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
Justin,
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> whatever). Why should the Jakarta project increase their management
> burden when they already have problems managing what they have?
>
What problems do you see that Jakarta has managing what it has? BTW, this is
a genuine question, not flamebait. I have seen this statement repeated often
and would like to understand its basis.
> I'm just not seeing a compelling reason why the ASF should add
> Tapestry.
What would be the compelling reason that you would see for the ASF to accept
any project? If Tapestry does not satisfy these requirements, then what sort
of project would, IYHO, meet them? IOW, can the incubator function at all?
> I believe *our*
> primary goal is to help develop new communities.
>
> To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think we
> can add substantial value to Tapestry. The word for this list is
> 'incubator.'
In this case I think the incubator is for the incubation of the Apache Way
of doing things in an existing project and its participants. The resolution
that formed the incubator states:
RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC be and hereby is
responsible for the acceptance and oversight of new products
submitted or proposed to become part of the Foundation;
> This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation. If
> someone has a compelling argument for addition, I'd like to hear it.
> But, I must say that I haven't seen one yet. -- justin
>
Isn't the incubator supposed to decide exactly that question? One of the
problems with the incubator is when the ultimate answer is "No", what then
for a project such as Tapestry that has undergone such changes? I'd like to
see some discussion around that, for I feel it may be very difficult to say
No after acceptance into the Incubator.
Conor
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 06:00 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>>
>>> Why not a top-level project? I'd be ok with that as a result.
>>
>>
>> The tapestry community prefered to join Jakarta. From a visibility
>> prospect this makes the most sense. Most people at work have
>> jakarta.apache.org as their homepage.
>
>
> Being a top-level project does not exclude a project from being
> linked from a Jakarta webpage.
>
Yeah. Like I said, I don't think I, Sam or the Tapestry committers care
whether its "top level" or not provided it appears where people expect
it (on Jakarta). (Anyone who I just presumed to speak for who does
care, speak up)
> -aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 07:22 PM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 06:00 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>>> Why not a top-level project? I'd be ok with that as a result.
>>
>> The tapestry community prefered to join Jakarta. From a visibility
>> prospect this makes the most sense. Most people at work have
>> jakarta.apache.org as their homepage.
>
> Being a top-level project does not exclude a project from being
> linked from a Jakarta webpage.
being a top level project - or not - should be more about how the ASF
supervises and manages the project and less about being a part of jakarta
(or not).
the link from the jakarta home page is just a physical manifestation of
the relationship. i can see why the tapestry community might want to
belong to the jakarta community - and some of the advantages that it would
bring. there should really be no reason why tapestry couldn't be part of
jakarta but supervised by the ASF as a top-level project (if that turns
out to be the best plan). indeed - as i understand it - that's the model
that most of jakarta will be (slowly) moving towards in the future.
- robert
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 06:00 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>> Why not a top-level project? I'd be ok with that as a result.
>
> The tapestry community prefered to join Jakarta. From a visibility
> prospect this makes the most sense. Most people at work have
> jakarta.apache.org as their homepage.
Being a top-level project does not exclude a project from being
linked from a Jakarta webpage.
-aaron
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> Why not a top-level project? I'd be ok with that as a result.
>
The tapestry community prefered to join Jakarta. From a visibility
prospect this makes the most sense. Most people at work have
jakarta.apache.org as their homepage.
>
>
> I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry developers
> originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all new projects were
> supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK), that's how they got here.
>
>>From the homepage "The Incubator project was created in October of 2002 to
> provide an entry path to the Apache Software Foundation for projects and
> codebases wishing to become part of the Foundation's efforts. Code
> donations from external organisations and existing external projects
> wishing to move to Apache will enter through the Incubator. ". To me that
> sounds like the incubator's job is to handle adoptions.
>
>
>>If someone has a compelling argument for addition, I'd like to hear
>>it. But, I must say that I haven't seen one yet. -- justin
>
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
> Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Ruby" <ru...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> The tapestry developers have demonstrated a fair amount of patience,
> persistence, and good humour in all of this. Each time we have set the
> bar, they have risen to the challenge, and we have responded by raising
> the bar. My request is that we set the bar one last time. This time
> for good.
You know, you could respond by *lowering* the bar, a little :-)
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
> Let's all follow the second half of the equation. And not turn this
> into a referendum on Jakarta, or on me, or Andy.
>
+1 Jakarta
+1 Sam
-1 Andy (that guy is a pain in the a**)
> The tapestry developers have demonstrated a fair amount of patience,
> persistence, and good humour in all of this. Each time we have set the
> bar, they have risen to the challenge, and we have responded by raising
> the bar. My request is that we set the bar one last time. This time
> for good.
>
+1 Absolutely. Pretty Pretty please lets. Much better said than my
message, thats what I was trying to poke at.
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
>>Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
>>and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
>>development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
>>list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
>>start if that is OK with them.
>>
>
>
> Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
I can speak freely since I'm a caveman over here :)
> On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
> yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository snapshot
> with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how is
> it done? There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
> (for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
> etc.).
cvs import will do just fine, I assume. Maybe it's better that you prune
the source tree before that. If you are willing to loose the history,
that makes things easier, but I don't think this is a requirement.
Quite honestly, I don't see much value in the incubation process for
Tapestry. Unfortunately, http://incubator.apache.org/resolution.html
seems to indicate it is a requirement projects to pass through this
incubation process, stalling the process in this precise case.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Tapestry CVS repository now ready for import
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
doh.. .6:00pm EST (its now 8:50 am)
Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
>Hot off the SourceForge:
>
>http://tapestry.sf.net/tapestry-cvsroot-Jan-7-2003.tar.gz
>
>This contains a CVSROOT and several modules, only the "Tapestry" module is
>relevant.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Sander Striker" <st...@apache.org>
>To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
>Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 11:35 AM
>Subject: RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
>
>
>
>
>>>From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:hlship@attbi.com]
>>>Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:01 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>>Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
>>>>and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
>>>>development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
>>>>list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
>>>>start if that is OK with them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
>>>
>>>
>>Humor popping up I hope ;). I'd consider that a bit too low of a bar...
>>
>>If Tapestry is indeed "a community project, and now follows the Apache
>>meritocracy rules to guide its future development.", then the incubation
>>period will be very short.
>>
>>Hopefully going through incubation proves helpfull in integrating
>>with other ASF projects, and in understanding our guidelines.
>>
>>
>>
>>>On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
>>>yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository
>>>
>>>
>snapshot
>
>
>>>with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how
>>>
>>>
>is
>
>
>>>it done?
>>>
>>>
>>Put the tarball on a publicly accessible place and post the url to the
>>general@incubator list. We'll figure out whose going to pick it up to
>>do the import.
>>
>>
>>
>>>There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
>>>(for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
>>>etc.).
>>>
>>>
>>Wouldn't you prefer to keep all history?
>>
>>Sander
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
>
Re: Tapestry CVS repository now ready for import
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
I will do this at 6:00pm this evening if no one beats me to it.
Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
>Hot off the SourceForge:
>
>http://tapestry.sf.net/tapestry-cvsroot-Jan-7-2003.tar.gz
>
>This contains a CVSROOT and several modules, only the "Tapestry" module is
>relevant.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Sander Striker" <st...@apache.org>
>To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
>Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 11:35 AM
>Subject: RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
>
>
>
>
>>>From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:hlship@attbi.com]
>>>Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:01 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>>Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
>>>>and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
>>>>development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
>>>>list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
>>>>start if that is OK with them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
>>>
>>>
>>Humor popping up I hope ;). I'd consider that a bit too low of a bar...
>>
>>If Tapestry is indeed "a community project, and now follows the Apache
>>meritocracy rules to guide its future development.", then the incubation
>>period will be very short.
>>
>>Hopefully going through incubation proves helpfull in integrating
>>with other ASF projects, and in understanding our guidelines.
>>
>>
>>
>>>On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
>>>yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository
>>>
>>>
>snapshot
>
>
>>>with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how
>>>
>>>
>is
>
>
>>>it done?
>>>
>>>
>>Put the tarball on a publicly accessible place and post the url to the
>>general@incubator list. We'll figure out whose going to pick it up to
>>do the import.
>>
>>
>>
>>>There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
>>>(for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
>>>etc.).
>>>
>>>
>>Wouldn't you prefer to keep all history?
>>
>>Sander
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
>
Tapestry CVS repository now ready for import
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
Hot off the SourceForge:
http://tapestry.sf.net/tapestry-cvsroot-Jan-7-2003.tar.gz
This contains a CVSROOT and several modules, only the "Tapestry" module is
relevant.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sander Striker" <st...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 11:35 AM
Subject: RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> > From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:hlship@attbi.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:01 PM
>
> >> Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
> >> and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
> >> development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
> >> list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
> >> start if that is OK with them.
> >
> > Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
>
> Humor popping up I hope ;). I'd consider that a bit too low of a bar...
>
> If Tapestry is indeed "a community project, and now follows the Apache
> meritocracy rules to guide its future development.", then the incubation
> period will be very short.
>
> Hopefully going through incubation proves helpfull in integrating
> with other ASF projects, and in understanding our guidelines.
>
> > On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
> > yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository
snapshot
> > with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how
is
> > it done?
>
> Put the tarball on a publicly accessible place and post the url to the
> general@incubator list. We'll figure out whose going to pick it up to
> do the import.
>
> > There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
> > (for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
> > etc.).
>
> Wouldn't you prefer to keep all history?
>
> Sander
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
RE: Tapestry Upload CVS
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:hlship@attbi.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 1:26 PM
> SourceForge still hasn't provided a "nightly" tarball with all the changes
> in it.
No rush. Just let us know when it is available.
> I think we should install the complete Tapestry module (as jakarta-tapestry
> ?) and decide what to prune later.
+1.
Sander
Tapestry Upload CVS
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
SourceForge still hasn't provided a "nightly" tarball with all the changes
in it.
I think we should install the complete Tapestry module (as jakarta-tapestry
?) and decide what to prune later.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sander Striker" <st...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 11:35 AM
Subject: RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> > From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:hlship@attbi.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:01 PM
>
> >> Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
> >> and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
> >> development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
> >> list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
> >> start if that is OK with them.
> >
> > Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
>
> Humor popping up I hope ;). I'd consider that a bit too low of a bar...
>
> If Tapestry is indeed "a community project, and now follows the Apache
> meritocracy rules to guide its future development.", then the incubation
> period will be very short.
>
> Hopefully going through incubation proves helpfull in integrating
> with other ASF projects, and in understanding our guidelines.
>
> > On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
> > yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository
snapshot
> > with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how
is
> > it done?
>
> Put the tarball on a publicly accessible place and post the url to the
> general@incubator list. We'll figure out whose going to pick it up to
> do the import.
>
> > There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
> > (for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
> > etc.).
>
> Wouldn't you prefer to keep all history?
>
> Sander
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Howard M. Lewis Ship [mailto:hlship@attbi.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:01 PM
>> Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
>> and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
>> development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
>> list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
>> start if that is OK with them.
>
> Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
Humor popping up I hope ;). I'd consider that a bit too low of a bar...
If Tapestry is indeed "a community project, and now follows the Apache
meritocracy rules to guide its future development.", then the incubation
period will be very short.
Hopefully going through incubation proves helpfull in integrating
with other ASF projects, and in understanding our guidelines.
> On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
> yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository snapshot
> with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how is
> it done?
Put the tarball on a publicly accessible place and post the url to the
general@incubator list. We'll figure out whose going to pick it up to
do the import.
> There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
> (for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
> etc.).
Wouldn't you prefer to keep all history?
Sander
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
> Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
> and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
> development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
> list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
> start if that is OK with them.
>
Yes, that would count as "lowering the bar" (see my previous message).
On the CVS front ... my last commits to the SF CVS repository went in
yesterday (Sat Jan 4). I should be able to get a CVS repository snapshot
with those changes on Jan 6. Who is going to handle the import, and how is
it done? There's a lot of legacy cruft in there that could be filtered out
(for instance, old PDF documents, the old source tree as com/primix/*,
etc.).
> Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
> Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
> Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
> stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Thats great!
Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
> BTW ... will it be Tapestry in Jakarta, or will it be Jakarta in Tapestry
> (http://www.purrfection.com/gallery/030jane.htm)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steven Noels" <st...@outerthought.org>
> To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 10:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
>
>
>
>>Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The tapestry developers have demonstrated a fair amount of patience,
>>>persistence, and good humour in all of this. Each time we have set the
>>>bar, they have risen to the challenge, and we have responded by raising
>>>the bar. My request is that we set the bar one last time. This time
>>>for good.
>>
>>To me it seems all this tells more about 'our' situation rather than
>>Tapestry. Is their CVS module created yet? We do have a list of
>>committers (http://tapestry.sourceforge.net/dev_frame.html, just add
>>some email addresses which I'm sure Andy will provide, or look at
>>http://sourceforge.net/project/memberlist.php?group_id=4754), set up 2
>>mailing lists, and done.
>>
>>They know they have to go through some painfull package renaming to
>>better fit with the rest, they sure know how to handle CVS when we've
>>got things set up for them, they're pretty eager to come over.
>>
>>Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
>>and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
>>development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
>>list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
>>start if that is OK with them.
>>
>>(withdrawing to my cave)
>>
>></Steven>
>>--
>>Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
>>Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
>>Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
>>stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
BTW ... will it be Tapestry in Jakarta, or will it be Jakarta in Tapestry
(http://www.purrfection.com/gallery/030jane.htm)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Noels" <st...@outerthought.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> > The tapestry developers have demonstrated a fair amount of patience,
> > persistence, and good humour in all of this. Each time we have set the
> > bar, they have risen to the challenge, and we have responded by raising
> > the bar. My request is that we set the bar one last time. This time
> > for good.
>
> To me it seems all this tells more about 'our' situation rather than
> Tapestry. Is their CVS module created yet? We do have a list of
> committers (http://tapestry.sourceforge.net/dev_frame.html, just add
> some email addresses which I'm sure Andy will provide, or look at
> http://sourceforge.net/project/memberlist.php?group_id=4754), set up 2
> mailing lists, and done.
>
> They know they have to go through some painfull package renaming to
> better fit with the rest, they sure know how to handle CVS when we've
> got things set up for them, they're pretty eager to come over.
>
> Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
> and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
> development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
> list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
> start if that is OK with them.
>
> (withdrawing to my cave)
>
> </Steven>
> --
> Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
> Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
> Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
> stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>>
>> What is important here is not hard and fast Rules (with a capital
>> "R"), but that we all apply common sense and try to work together.
>
>
> +1
>
>> FWIW, as a member of the board of directors, I voted *FOR* the
>
> > incubator. At the time, I didn't see it as a gatekeeper, but as a
> > resource or facilitator. To date, all I have seen is evidence of the
> > former.
>
> i find that very discouraging. 'resource/facilitator' would seem to
> be a primarily passive thing, such as through the web site (glossary,
> anyone?). i'm not sure i see how any active role surrounding the
> aspect of 'new projects must come through the incubator' can realistically
> be seen *without* some bit of 'gatekeeper'ness.
By being such a great help and respected community builder that projects
WANT to come through the process. To resource/facilitator I'd add
valuable mentor. All the best mentors that I've ever had, made me seek
the mentoring from them. Only the bad ones forced it.
By advocating (and making it so) the incubator as a resource of helpful
people who facilitate community building, help you find the right way to
get your mail lists, wiki pages, web site, etc set up. If that were
done, I'd WANT my next project to come through the incubator. As it
stands, I'm leaning towards just not doing it at Apache at all. (not
saying anyone wants it here or anything, just thats how I feel about it).
The best example of this is Sam's Gump tool. No one MADE all of these
projects (http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/latest/) use Gump. Peer
pressure, the fact that Gump performed a valueable service, etc. Sam
just was responsive to requests and "if you build it they will come" and
Gump is now building like everything. And sam did this wihtout
utilizing "control"!
-Andy
incubator vs individual PMCs? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 07:27:29PM +0100, Steven Noels wrote:
>...
> A rule might be that it is up to the individual PMCs to decide whether
> they are able & willing to handle a donation on their own, or prefer it
> to be 'handled' by the Incubator. In the case of Tapestry, I can only
> hope the Jakarta PMC would decide they are able to be self-supporting in
> setting up Tapestry as a subproject.
No. One of the primary purposes of the Incubator, which hasn't been
mentioned in this recent thread, is managing the legal aspects around
arriving software. The Incubator is specifically charged with handling the
new project so they can ensure that the licenses are properly changed, the
various copyrights are protected, and that we have contributor agreements
and/or software grants for all incoming software.
Individual PMCs are *not* supposed to accept incoming software. That has
been broken in the past, and there are unclear rules and procedures. The
Incubator is intended to provide a specific sequence of steps and a
checklist for ensuring that the ASF has properly accepted responsibility for
the software.
Cheers,
-g
--
gstein@apache.org ... ASF Chairman ... http://www.apache.org/
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>> FWIW, as a member of the board of directors, I voted *FOR* the
>
> > incubator. At the time, I didn't see it as a gatekeeper, but as a
> > resource or facilitator. To date, all I have seen is evidence of the
> > former.
>
> i find that very discouraging. 'resource/facilitator' would seem to
> be a primarily passive thing, such as through the web site (glossary,
> anyone?). i'm not sure i see how any active role surrounding the
> aspect of 'new projects must come through the incubator' can realistically
> be seen *without* some bit of 'gatekeeper'ness.
Is this 'responsibility means empowerment'?
If so, how come Tapestry appears to be lost?
A rule might be that it is up to the individual PMCs to decide whether
they are able & willing to handle a donation on their own, or prefer it
to be 'handled' by the Incubator. In the case of Tapestry, I can only
hope the Jakarta PMC would decide they are able to be self-supporting in
setting up Tapestry as a subproject.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> What is important here is not hard and fast Rules (with a capital "R"),
> but that we all apply common sense and try to work together.
+1
> FWIW, as a member of the board of directors, I voted *FOR* the
> incubator. At the time, I didn't see it as a gatekeeper, but as a
> resource or facilitator. To date, all I have seen is evidence of the
> former.
i find that very discouraging. 'resource/facilitator' would seem to
be a primarily passive thing, such as through the web site (glossary,
anyone?). i'm not sure i see how any active role surrounding the
aspect of 'new projects must come through the incubator' can realistically
be seen *without* some bit of 'gatekeeper'ness.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Sander Striker wrote:
>
>>Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
>>and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
>>development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
>>list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
>>start if that is OK with them.
>
> Sorry Steven, but _every_ project has to go through the Incubator. Some
> of them will remain there only a short period, others somewhat longer
> and some will die in the process.
This is a slippery slope with ill defined terms.
Can HTTPD accept a patch from a non-committer without involvement of the
incubator?
Can HTTPD vote in a new committer without involvement of the incubator?
Can HTTPD decide to reorganize their cvs into multiple directories
and/or repositories?
Do you see where I am heading?
The last I heard, Tapestry does not seek to become a "Capital P" project
in the ASF sense. Trust me, if I were inclined to do so, I could have
figured out a "legal" way to route around the incubator.
What is important here is not hard and fast Rules (with a capital "R"),
but that we all apply common sense and try to work together.
FWIW, as a member of the board of directors, I voted *FOR* the
incubator. At the time, I didn't see it as a gatekeeper, but as a
resource or facilitator. To date, all I have seen is evidence of the
former.
- Sam Ruby
RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Steven Noels [mailto:stevenn@outerthought.org]
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 4:40 PM
> Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
> and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
> development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
> list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
> start if that is OK with them.
Sorry Steven, but _every_ project has to go through the Incubator. Some
of them will remain there only a short period, others somewhat longer
and some will die in the process.
Sander
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> The tapestry developers have demonstrated a fair amount of patience,
> persistence, and good humour in all of this. Each time we have set the
> bar, they have risen to the challenge, and we have responded by raising
> the bar. My request is that we set the bar one last time. This time
> for good.
To me it seems all this tells more about 'our' situation rather than
Tapestry. Is their CVS module created yet? We do have a list of
committers (http://tapestry.sourceforge.net/dev_frame.html, just add
some email addresses which I'm sure Andy will provide, or look at
http://sourceforge.net/project/memberlist.php?group_id=4754), set up 2
mailing lists, and done.
They know they have to go through some painfull package renaming to
better fit with the rest, they sure know how to handle CVS when we've
got things set up for them, they're pretty eager to come over.
Incubator for a project which states "Tapestry is a community project,
and now follows the Apache meritocracy rules to guide its future
development." on its site, has 6 active committers and a busy mailing
list? Naaah. They should be a proper Jakarta subproject right from the
start if that is OK with them.
(withdrawing to my cave)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: mailing list organizatoin
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 09:32:18PM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> No, this does not belong on the community mailing list. If you
> are interested in helping foster new projects, and have opinions
> on how things like mailing lists should be formed, then join
> the incubator list.
You bet! +1 to that.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: mailing list organizatoin
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 09:32:18PM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> No, this does not belong on the community mailing list. If you
> are interested in helping foster new projects, and have opinions
> on how things like mailing lists should be formed, then join
> the incubator list.
You bet! +1 to that.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: mailing list organizatoin (was: [VOTE] Mother may I)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
No, this does not belong on the community mailing list. If you
are interested in helping foster new projects, and have opinions
on how things like mailing lists should be formed, then join
the incubator list.
-aaron
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 08:52 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>> +1
>> (There is a lot of this kind of experience and knowledge hanging
>> around in the backs of many of your heads -- we should write it down!)
>
> ccing community as I think we're moving sufficiently off course that
> its
> best discussed there.
Re: mailing list organizatoin (was: [VOTE] Mother may I)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
No, this does not belong on the community mailing list. If you
are interested in helping foster new projects, and have opinions
on how things like mailing lists should be formed, then join
the incubator list.
-aaron
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 08:52 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>> +1
>> (There is a lot of this kind of experience and knowledge hanging
>> around in the backs of many of your heads -- we should write it down!)
>
> ccing community as I think we're moving sufficiently off course that
> its
> best discussed there.
Re: mailing list organizatoin (was: [VOTE] Mother may I)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
> +1
>
> (There is a lot of this kind of experience and knowledge hanging
> around in the backs of many of your heads -- we should write it down!)
>
ccing community as I think we're moving sufficiently off course that its
best discussed there.
Started it:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?MailListBestPractices
Anyone who wishes to participate please feel free to edit this page.
Once it becomes useful I'll create a more formal page.
-Andy
> -aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: mailing list organizatoin (was: [VOTE] Mother may I)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
> +1
>
> (There is a lot of this kind of experience and knowledge hanging
> around in the backs of many of your heads -- we should write it down!)
>
ccing community as I think we're moving sufficiently off course that its
best discussed there.
Started it:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?MailListBestPractices
Anyone who wishes to participate please feel free to edit this page.
Once it becomes useful I'll create a more formal page.
-Andy
> -aaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: mailing list organizatoin (was: [VOTE] Mother may I)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 07:56 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Personally, I prefer the separation, and for keeping the users on the
> developer's list. Separating the user/dev lists makes it too easy for
> the
> developers to become detached from their actual users. Thus, placing
> the
> commits elsewhere is good for the casual mailing list subscriber (since
> "everybody" is on the single user/dev list).
>
> The single user/dev mailing list is *especially* important when a
> project
> first starts up. During that time period, it is very important to be
> close
> to the early adopters -- they'll have great feedback and will want to
> know
> what is going on with the project. It is only when a project is very
> mature
> that it becomes at all interesting to separate the two.
+1
(There is a lot of this kind of experience and knowledge hanging
around in the backs of many of your heads -- we should write it down!)
-aaron
Re: mailing list organization
Posted by Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 10:56 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 08:36:21PM -0500, Ben Hyde wrote:
>> Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> The proposal suggests a separate cvs mailing list. My recommendation
>>> is that cvs mail be directed to the -dev list. This accomplishes ...
>>
>> +1
>>
>> The separation of cvs@ and dev@ in httpd is before my time, I'd be
>> fascinated to hear stories about it. - ben
In my experience it's surprising how many committers aren't on any
given CVS mailing list. Pushing them together forces developers to
behave like I think they should - what could possibly be wrong with
that :-).
> Personally, I prefer the separation, and for keeping the users on the
> developer's list.
The CVS mailing list in the face of the developers is good because they
get to observe the code in pain. The user mailing list in the face of
the developers is good because they get to observe the users in pain.
:-)
I like to cling to the fantasy that developers are primarily users and
they have come to the project to coordinate with other developer-users
to solve a common problem. As that fantasy become more and more bogus
some scheme to increase the chance developers get a taste of the user's
pain is a good thing.
I like to cling to the fantasy that developers feel it's part of the
job to know enough about all the code in their project that they can
and in fact would be frightened not to keep an eye on every commit.
Sadly I know from experience that a surprisingly low percentage of
developers actually are on the cvs lists. That maybe just the lack of
clear instructions and reminders - something the incubator can help
with.
> I've been using and liking this model for a long while now.
I doubt there is a 'best practice' (what a pompus term that is!) here;
or if there is then it maybe complex to state... maybe something like:
- The vast majority of people involved with editing (or even
understanding)
the code should be on the relevant CVS lists. Many points of view
are
a big help in guarding code quality and capturing easy enhancements.
- You have to be on the dev list if you want to have a voice in how the
code evolves; users may find it useful to lurk on that list.
- ... I don't know exactly what to say about the user list that is
likely to get follow thru for a large user base.
mailing list organizatoin (was: [VOTE] Mother may I)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 08:36:21PM -0500, Ben Hyde wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
> > The proposal suggests a separate cvs mailing list. My recommendation
> > is that cvs mail be directed to the -dev list. This accomplishes ...
>
> +1
>
> The separation of cvs@ and dev@ in httpd is before my time, I'd be
> fascinated to hear stories about it. - ben
Personally, I prefer the separation, and for keeping the users on the
developer's list. Separating the user/dev lists makes it too easy for the
developers to become detached from their actual users. Thus, placing the
commits elsewhere is good for the casual mailing list subscriber (since
"everybody" is on the single user/dev list).
The single user/dev mailing list is *especially* important when a project
first starts up. During that time period, it is very important to be close
to the early adopters -- they'll have great feedback and will want to know
what is going on with the project. It is only when a project is very mature
that it becomes at all interesting to separate the two.
I've been using and liking this model for a long while now.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> The proposal suggests a separate cvs mailing list. My recommendation
> is that cvs mail be directed to the -dev list. This accomplishes ...
+1
The separation of cvs@ and dev@ in httpd is before my time, I'd be
fascinated to hear stories about it. - ben
Re: please signify Mail list preference WAS: Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
My preference is to keep the cvs messages separate but, since I monitor both
lists anyway, its no difference to me either way.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>; <ta...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 8:58 PM
Subject: please signify Mail list preference WAS: Re: [VOTE] Mother may I
(was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
> >
> > The proposal suggests a separate cvs mailing list. My recommendation is
> > that cvs mail be directed to the -dev list. This accomplishes two
things:
> >
> > 1) causes more -dev's to actually be exposed to each change. Or, at a
> > minimum, it eliminates an excuse. ;-)
> >
>
> I agree. This is how POI-dev opperates and it works quite well for us.
>
> > 2) keep -user's on the -user mailing list. Many users are smart, and
> > realize that the devs hang out on the dev list. I've actually had
> > requests from users to stop sending cvs email as they weren't devs. The
> > response was simple. ;-)
> >
>
> I agree, I quickly ask power users who start falling down the developer
> Cool I'll ask which they prefertrail to join the dev list....might as
> well push em ;-)
>
> > Both are personal recommendations, and by no means a requirement. How
> > the lists are to be configured is up to the direct participants.
> >
>
> Cool I'll ask which they prefer. Guys... What do you prefer?
>
> >> 7. work with Sam (whom I'm assuming will help me) to get tapestry
> >> building under Gump and the site updating from Gump
> >
> >
> > You can safely assume this.
> >
>
> :-) Why thank you Mr. Ruby.
>
> -Andy
>
> > - Sam Ruby
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
please signify Mail list preference WAS: Re: [VOTE] Mother may I
(was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> The proposal suggests a separate cvs mailing list. My recommendation is
> that cvs mail be directed to the -dev list. This accomplishes two things:
>
> 1) causes more -dev's to actually be exposed to each change. Or, at a
> minimum, it eliminates an excuse. ;-)
>
I agree. This is how POI-dev opperates and it works quite well for us.
> 2) keep -user's on the -user mailing list. Many users are smart, and
> realize that the devs hang out on the dev list. I've actually had
> requests from users to stop sending cvs email as they weren't devs. The
> response was simple. ;-)
>
I agree, I quickly ask power users who start falling down the developer
Cool I'll ask which they prefertrail to join the dev list....might as
well push em ;-)
> Both are personal recommendations, and by no means a requirement. How
> the lists are to be configured is up to the direct participants.
>
Cool I'll ask which they prefer. Guys... What do you prefer?
>> 7. work with Sam (whom I'm assuming will help me) to get tapestry
>> building under Gump and the site updating from Gump
>
>
> You can safely assume this.
>
:-) Why thank you Mr. Ruby.
-Andy
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> 2. import it,
> 3. ask the infrastructure to make the entries,
> 4. request the appropriate mailing lists
2,3, and 4 require cvsadmin privs on icarus, karma on CVSROOT, and
qmlist privs on nagoya. I can handle all of this.
One question in advance on #4, and I will choose to ask it publically here.
The proposal suggests a separate cvs mailing list. My recommendation is
that cvs mail be directed to the -dev list. This accomplishes two things:
1) causes more -dev's to actually be exposed to each change. Or, at a
minimum, it eliminates an excuse. ;-)
2) keep -user's on the -user mailing list. Many users are smart, and
realize that the devs hang out on the dev list. I've actually had
requests from users to stop sending cvs email as they weren't devs. The
response was simple. ;-)
Both are personal recommendations, and by no means a requirement. How
the lists are to be configured is up to the direct participants.
> 7. work with Sam (whom I'm assuming will help me) to get tapestry
> building under Gump and the site updating from Gump
You can safely assume this.
- Sam Ruby
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
[...]
> Please signify
> [+1] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -0 [why?]
> [ ] -1 [why?]
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
> All the above can be wiped out in seconds upon request.
>
> Andy, dIon, please don't proceed futher until this vote is complete.
>
I'm going ahead and gathering the account names and email addresses for
the request to root and planning out things like wiki imports (how we
plan to do it without taking the action) with howard and the gang. No
harm no foul and it keeps me sane...
Action is cool.
-Andy
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>>To help facilitate this (as in, eliminating critical path items), I went
>>ahead and created an *EMPTY* cvs repository, granted karma to acoliver
>>and dion *ONLY*, and created the dev and user mailing list (a separate
>>cvs mailing list will be created if that is desired outcome) with
>>acoliver@apache.org as the initial moderator to both.
>
>
> Make sure you create a tapestry-cvs@jakarta.apache.org alias forwarding to
> the dev list, too.
>
> BTW, one of the concerns I had about the incubator project was that
> projects would be rooted at "incubator", e.g. the CVS repos would be
> "/home/cvs/incubator-$project", the dev list at
> $project-dev@incubator.apache.org, etc - and this would mean a lot of name
> changing when a project moved out of the project. However, you've set
> this up so it's essentially inside the Jakarta project already. That's a
> nice way of avoiding the rename problem since we know where Tapestry would
> go (discussion about making it a top-level project notwithstanding), but
> is this a good pattern to set for the future?
>
I think for *accepting* projects that have a clear path of promotion.
Yes. If someone was starting a project in the incubator... no. If the
incubator accepted something that didn't have a clear path to promotion,
probably not (then again, why wouldn't that go in commons?).
-Andy
> Brian
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> I can all be
> wiped out in seconds.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
Only in the surf Sam :-)
Conor
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>>To help facilitate this (as in, eliminating critical path items), I went
>>ahead and created an *EMPTY* cvs repository, granted karma to acoliver
>>and dion *ONLY*, and created the dev and user mailing list (a separate
>>cvs mailing list will be created if that is desired outcome) with
>>acoliver@apache.org as the initial moderator to both.
>
> Make sure you create a tapestry-cvs@jakarta.apache.org alias forwarding to
> the dev list, too.
Think I was born yesterday? ;-)
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 qmlist qmlist 33 Jan 5 18:36 .qmail-jakarta-tapestry-cvs
Note the timestamp (yes, I could easily forge that, but I didn't). I
didn't mention it because where the cvs messages go is still under
discussion, and didn't want to mention that I set it up the way I (and
perhaps apparently you?) think it ought to be done. ;-)
> BTW, one of the concerns I had about the incubator project was that
> projects would be rooted at "incubator", e.g. the CVS repos would be
> "/home/cvs/incubator-$project", the dev list at
> $project-dev@incubator.apache.org, etc - and this would mean a lot of name
> changing when a project moved out of the project. However, you've set
> this up so it's essentially inside the Jakarta project already. That's a
> nice way of avoiding the rename problem since we know where Tapestry would
> go (discussion about making it a top-level project notwithstanding), but
> is this a good pattern to set for the future?
Suggestions?
Sometimes the best way to focus discussion is to take concrete action.
I was merely cueing off of (1) Ken's note that the only obstacles that
remained were technical todos, (2) the tapestry proposal itself, and (3)
the string of +1 votes that came in yesterday, in particular the one
Sander Striker - his vote was clearly not an automatic +1, but an
indication that that his concerns either have been, or are well on their
way towards being, addressed.
Anyway, it took only a few minutes to set up what I did. I can all be
wiped out in seconds.
- Sam Ruby
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Sam Ruby wrote:
> To help facilitate this (as in, eliminating critical path items), I went
> ahead and created an *EMPTY* cvs repository, granted karma to acoliver
> and dion *ONLY*, and created the dev and user mailing list (a separate
> cvs mailing list will be created if that is desired outcome) with
> acoliver@apache.org as the initial moderator to both.
Make sure you create a tapestry-cvs@jakarta.apache.org alias forwarding to
the dev list, too.
BTW, one of the concerns I had about the incubator project was that
projects would be rooted at "incubator", e.g. the CVS repos would be
"/home/cvs/incubator-$project", the dev list at
$project-dev@incubator.apache.org, etc - and this would mean a lot of name
changing when a project moved out of the project. However, you've set
this up so it's essentially inside the Jakarta project already. That's a
nice way of avoiding the rename problem since we know where Tapestry would
go (discussion about making it a top-level project notwithstanding), but
is this a good pattern to set for the future?
Brian
Re: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> May I:
>
> 1. Get the snapshot from howard,
> 2. import it,
> 3. ask the infrastructure to make the entries,
> 4. request the appropriate mailing lists
To help facilitate this (as in, eliminating critical path items), I went
ahead and created an *EMPTY* cvs repository, granted karma to acoliver
and dion *ONLY*, and created the dev and user mailing list (a separate
cvs mailing list will be created if that is desired outcome) with
acoliver@apache.org as the initial moderator to both.
All the above can be wiped out in seconds upon request.
Andy, dIon, please don't proceed futher until this vote is complete.
- Sam Ruby
RE: [VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> [X] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -0 [why?]
> [ ] -1 [why?]
Sander
[VOTE] Mother may I (was: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
> Somebody has to speak for the rest of the incubator. Part of the problem
> that has happened is that everybody is waiting for everybody else to state
> that consensus is reached. As a result, it never appears that consensus is
> present, so nobody attempts to do anything.
>
> IMO, the first step in the Incubator process should be "name a shepherd".
> That person can then drive the acquisition of votes when needed, start
> following the necessary legal checklists, perform/request the infrastructure
> bits, and then the group can get down to the actual Apache Way Brainwashing.
>
The tapestry community is certfied by my to have been brainwashed as to
meritocracy, consenus, voting rules. Evidence is apparent in their
mailing list archive for the last few months. You'll see a consistant
pattern of voting and community based decion making.
<joke requestedaction="laugh,smirk,ignore">
I didn't teach them how to have a wicked flame war and fillibuster but
I'm sure they'll figure that out on their own.
</joke>
May I:
1. Get the snapshot from howard,
2. import it,
3. ask the infrastructure to make the entries,
4. request the appropriate mailing lists
5. ask the developers to all send me requested account names which I
will munge if already taken
6. create the website (under jakarta.apache.org/proposals/incubator with
a redirected link from jakarta.apache.org/incubator to save poor
confused users like me from having to think real hard)
7. work with Sam (whom I'm assuming will help me) to get tapestry
building under Gump and the site updating from Gump
8. Work with howard to import the wiki (if they want) via some means
(whatever requires the least effort and produces the maximum outcome)
9. Graciously Accept help from anyone else who wants to help.
Please signify
[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -0 [why?]
[ ] -1 [why?]
Thanks,
Andy
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>.
At 3:08 PM -0800 1/5/03, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>IMO, the first step in the Incubator process should be "name a shepherd".
>That person can then drive the acquisition of votes when needed, start
>following the necessary legal checklists, perform/request the infrastructure
>bits, and then the group can get down to the actual Apache Way Brainwashing.
>
I think that a separate shepherd for each proposed project makes sense
and should be part of the (initial) Incubation effort. Having it the
same person all the time would, I think, tend to be unwise in the
long run.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 12:58:20PM -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
> >
> > To make an oversweeping generalization, Jakara is tired. They have been
> > asked again and again, in many different ways, would it be OK if
> > Tapestry becomes a Jakarta subproject. The answer has been yes, yes,
> > yes, and once again yes. The more times the question is asked, the less
> > responses are returned.
>
> good enough for me, then. i can't speak for the rest of the incubator
> pmc, but i'm now abundantly satisfied.
Somebody has to speak for the rest of the incubator. Part of the problem
that has happened is that everybody is waiting for everybody else to state
that consensus is reached. As a result, it never appears that consensus is
present, so nobody attempts to do anything.
IMO, the first step in the Incubator process should be "name a shepherd".
That person can then drive the acquisition of votes when needed, start
following the necessary legal checklists, perform/request the infrastructure
bits, and then the group can get down to the actual Apache Way Brainwashing.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
you know what i think would be particularly useful to/for
the incubator? feedback from the tapestry people about
terms/procesures/relationships they find unclear, and ways
in which they find/are finding the incubation onerous.
the former can help update the documentation and the web
site, and the latter can help improve the active roles
if the incubator.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> If so, I can take care of nearly *all* those technical to-dos
> personally, and can take care of initiating the request to root for the
> one remaining item.
>
> I've been reticent to initiate this, lest it infuriate half of the ASF
> membership...
Some of us still remember http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/984.html :)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
No more voting on Tapestry, please
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@apache.org>.
> Is there consensus on this? Perhaps this can be brought to a [VOTE]
> of the incubator PMC?
The incubator PMC already voted on Tapestry last year (Dec 28) and
already
approved it, but the vote was held on the wrong mailing list and most of
the PMC is just now getting back to reading mail on a regular basis
after a very disruptive holiday schedule.
And, to echo Greg's words, what I said at the time was that it wasn't
up to the incubator to approve or disapprove, but rather to decide how
it was to be accomplished. We were in the process of that when all this
NOISE started about whether or not we should accept a project that the
ASF
had already decided elsewhere to accept!
PLEASE folks, if you are interested in helping the incubation process
in any way, PLEASE volunteer to be on the mailing lists and be on the
PMC. I will personally nominate any ASF member or long-time committer
that wishes to work on incubation to be on the PMC. What I will not do
is encourage people who do not have time to volunteer to use this as yet
another forum for them to spout off about the direction of the ASF.
I don't have time to read your comments outside of the appropriate
forums.
Sam/Andy, go ahead and start jakarta-tapestry (and the reason it is
called that is because we want the mailing lists to be handled by
jakarta.apache.org and not for any other reason someone might imagine).
I strongly encourage you to start creating project-specific Unix
groups for "tapestry" NOW, rather than continue to put everything
under the jakarta group, regardless of the PMC status. Please
verify with Jim that we have the appropriate software grant, signed
and delivered to the ASF, before linking to it from our website.
Meanwhile, the incubator volunteers need to start incorporating what
we have learned from this process into the website documentation.
....Roy
Re: importing CVS tarballs (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Cool! Thanks!
>
>
> fyi, the way this happens is pretty easy.
>
> 1. get the tarball of their previous repository (the thing with all the ,v
> files stored in it)
>
> 2. untar the thing on icarus
>
> 3. mv or cp the resulting tree to /home/cvs/jakarta-tapestry
>
> 4. ensure the directories are owned by the 'jakarta' Unix group
>
> 5. ensure the dirs have mode 0664 and files are 0444
>
> 6. get the appropriate entries in CVSROOT/avail (you'll need to send a
> request to infrastructure@ for somebody to do that; the people allowed
> are listed in the avail file for the CVSROOT module)
>
> 7. tell the people to "turn off" the old CVS repository
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
importing CVS tarballs (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:50:56PM -0500, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> As a sponsoring member I had planned to:
>
> set up the tapestry website
> set up the cvs module (wouldn't mind some help though, haven't done the
> import with history in awhile if ever)
fyi, the way this happens is pretty easy.
1. get the tarball of their previous repository (the thing with all the ,v
files stored in it)
2. untar the thing on icarus
3. mv or cp the resulting tree to /home/cvs/jakarta-tapestry
4. ensure the directories are owned by the 'jakarta' Unix group
5. ensure the dirs have mode 0664 and files are 0444
6. get the appropriate entries in CVSROOT/avail (you'll need to send a
request to infrastructure@ for somebody to do that; the people allowed
are listed in the avail file for the CVSROOT module)
7. tell the people to "turn off" the old CVS repository
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
>>
>> afaik, the only obstacles now aren't
>> obstacles, just technical to-dos (accounts, cvs, et cetera).
>
>
> HOT DAMN!
>
> Is there consensus on this? Perhaps this can be brought to a [VOTE] of
> the incubator PMC?
>
> If so, I can take care of nearly *all* those technical to-dos
> personally, and can take care of initiating the request to root for the
> one remaining item.
>
> I've been reticent to initiate this, lest it infuriate half of the ASF
> membership...
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
As a sponsoring member I had planned to:
set up the tapestry website
set up the cvs module (wouldn't mind some help though, haven't done the
import with history in awhile if ever)
submit the account requests
work with howard to find a way to import the wiki pages
work with sam to get tapestry building under GUMP
But Sam doing it all is even better! ;-)
-Andy
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
> afaik, the only obstacles now aren't
> obstacles, just technical to-dos (accounts, cvs, et cetera).
HOT DAMN!
Is there consensus on this? Perhaps this can be brought to a [VOTE] of
the incubator PMC?
If so, I can take care of nearly *all* those technical to-dos
personally, and can take care of initiating the request to root for the
one remaining item.
I've been reticent to initiate this, lest it infuriate half of the ASF
membership...
- Sam Ruby
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> To make an oversweeping generalization, Jakara is tired. They have been
> asked again and again, in many different ways, would it be OK if
> Tapestry becomes a Jakarta subproject. The answer has been yes, yes,
> yes, and once again yes. The more times the question is asked, the less
> responses are returned.
good enough for me, then. i can't speak for the rest of the incubator
pmc, but i'm now abundantly satisfied.
> When I asked what was desired, I got the following response from Ken Coar:
>
>> it would be nice to have such a binding answer from the jakarta project,
>> and even nicer to have interested parties from jakarta (including but
>> not limited to andy) watching and participating in the process to a)
>> ensure
>> that tapestry doesn't morph away from what jakarta agreed to accept, and
>> b) help the incubator people identify and fix issues. just as andy
>> and dIon
>> have already done in this very thread (thanks!).
>
>
> We clearly are pursuing the "and even nicer" path of this. I realize
> that Ken wanted both, my immediate knee-jerk reaction to the first term
> in the boolean expression was to respond with a "it would be nice to
> have such a binding answer from the incubator project", but I am trying
> to maintain my cool.
binding answer to *what* from the incubator? i am not trying to be
difficult, sam; quite the opposite. let me rephrase it: i, personally,
think it would be a good thing for all concerned -- asf, tapestry,
jakarta, incubator -- to have as many knowledgeable and (constructively)
critical eyes watching the tapestry incubation as possible. i now feel
entirely comfortable (and i hope everyone else does) that jakarta has
reserved a spot for tapestry. afaik, the only obstacles now aren't
obstacles, just technical to-dos (accounts, cvs, et cetera).
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>> I don't think that there are any foregone conclusions wrt Tapestry.
>> They've put forward a proposal, various people in the Jakarta
>> project were enthusiastic and hence it's come to the incubator.
>> What happens from here is a complete unknown.
>
> That depends. I believe Sam said in a thread that he just hoped that
> the lack of comment meant that it was okay to add it to Jakarta.
I am quite capable of lighting a fire under the current PMC members to
get them to express a vote. I have not yet chosen to do so yet.
To make an oversweeping generalization, Jakara is tired. They have been
asked again and again, in many different ways, would it be OK if
Tapestry becomes a Jakarta subproject. The answer has been yes, yes,
yes, and once again yes. The more times the question is asked, the less
responses are returned.
And that's not because they "avoided the question in spectacular
fashion.".
When I asked what was desired, I got the following response from Ken Coar:
> it would be nice to have such a binding answer from the jakarta project,
> and even nicer to have interested parties from jakarta (including but
> not limited to andy) watching and participating in the process to a) ensure
> that tapestry doesn't morph away from what jakarta agreed to accept, and
> b) help the incubator people identify and fix issues. just as andy and dIon
> have already done in this very thread (thanks!).
We clearly are pursuing the "and even nicer" path of this. I realize
that Ken wanted both, my immediate knee-jerk reaction to the first term
in the boolean expression was to respond with a "it would be nice to
have such a binding answer from the incubator project", but I am trying
to maintain my cool.
Let's all follow the second half of the equation. And not turn this
into a referendum on Jakarta, or on me, or Andy.
The tapestry developers have demonstrated a fair amount of patience,
persistence, and good humour in all of this. Each time we have set the
bar, they have risen to the challenge, and we have responded by raising
the bar. My request is that we set the bar one last time. This time
for good.
- Sam Ruby
Re: who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
> Let's get Tapestry rolling instead of trying to wear a cap that doesn't
> belong here.
>
Absolutely.
Re: who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:31:43AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>>...
>>
>>>I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry
>>>developers originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all
>>>new projects were supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK),
>>>that's how they got here.
>>
>>And, perhaps, the role of the Incubator is to place a brake on some
>>of the growth. Or, perhaps not (the incubator PMC gets to decide).
>>Uncontrolled growth may not be beneficial long-term. But, I've yet
>>to see a discussion on how much growth we're willing to handle.
>
>
> That is absolutely not the role for the Incubator. The Board did not create
> it with the idea that it is the decision maker on what belongs at the ASF.
> That is up to all of the PMCs. The Incubator is for dealing with their
> decisions -- for bringing the code in and ensuring the new community
> observes our requirements and ideals.
>
> The Jakarta PMC said "yes, we want it" and now the Incubator is responsible
> for dealing with that.
That's what I told Andy when he questioned me about what the Incubator
should do. And that's also why I got a bit angry with the current
yes-no-yes-no-wewantit-nowedon't stuff.
Let's get Tapestry rolling instead of trying to wear a cap that doesn't
belong here.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Wow, if that is how the incubator is to function I absolutely want to be
a part of it.
What I am observing does not seem to match this.
-Andy
>
>
> That is absolutely not the role for the Incubator. The Board did not create
> it with the idea that it is the decision maker on what belongs at the ASF.
> That is up to all of the PMCs. The Incubator is for dealing with their
> decisions -- for bringing the code in and ensuring the new community
> observes our requirements and ideals.
>
> The Jakarta PMC said "yes, we want it" and now the Incubator is responsible
> for dealing with that.
>
> If the HTTPD PMC said "yes, we want mod_whatzit" then the Incubator brings
> it into the ASF.
>
> But the Incubator *CANNOT* dictate their ideas of what is or is not "proper"
> for the ASF to those other PMCs. Absolutely not. If there is any question
> about that, then I'm more than happy to get an official statement from the
> Board to that effect.
>
> "Wah wah, but that means the PMCs can create unbounded work for us." Those
> other PMCs should be participating in the process. If they impose too much
> work and the incubation process slows as a result, then they can help it
> along (in their own self-interest) by adding their own people to the mix.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Re: who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Sunday, January 5, 2003 2:27 PM -0800 Greg Stein
<gs...@apache.org> wrote:
> The Jakarta PMC said "yes, we want it" and now the Incubator is
> responsible for dealing with that.
And, how should the ASF deal with creation of new PMCs? -- justin
Re: who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 02:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:31:43AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> ...
>>> I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry
>>> developers originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all
>>> new projects were supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK),
>>> that's how they got here.
>>
>> And, perhaps, the role of the Incubator is to place a brake on some
>> of the growth. Or, perhaps not (the incubator PMC gets to decide).
>> Uncontrolled growth may not be beneficial long-term. But, I've yet
>> to see a discussion on how much growth we're willing to handle.
>
> That is absolutely not the role for the Incubator. The Board did not
> create
> it with the idea that it is the decision maker on what belongs at the
> ASF.
> That is up to all of the PMCs. The Incubator is for dealing with their
> decisions -- for bringing the code in and ensuring the new community
> observes our requirements and ideals.
That's quite harsh, and I think you're missing Justin's point. It seems
to me he's saying that the Incubator is here to make sure that
new projects follow our rules and don't get out of control. It is
obvious that this is a problem that Incubator was created in part to
solve. Staying under control may mean "placing a brake" on the
expectations
of some of the current PMCs, at least to begin with, but once we're all
on the same page WRT ASF expectations, oversight obligations, etc...
then I don't see the Incubator acting as a "brake" anymore.
> The Jakarta PMC said "yes, we want it" and now the Incubator is
> responsible
> for dealing with that.
Correct, assuming "it" is in line with the foundation philosophies:
RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC is responsible for
regularly evaluating products under its purview and making the
determination in each case of whether the product should be
abandoned, continue to receive guidance and support, or
proposed to the board for promotion to full project status as
part of an existing or new Foundation PMC; and be it further
> If the HTTPD PMC said "yes, we want mod_whatzit" then the Incubator
> brings
> it into the ASF.
>
> But the Incubator *CANNOT* dictate their ideas of what is or is not
> "proper"
> for the ASF to those other PMCs. Absolutely not. If there is any
> question
> about that, then I'm more than happy to get an official statement from
> the
> Board to that effect.
I don't believe it is within the responsibility or right of the
Incubator
PMC to tell other PMCs how to interpret their own charters. That means
that
at a technological level Incubator has little or no say. That is not
what is on the table here, though. What's on the table is whether or not
said new project(s) are in line with ASF philosophies, and if they ever
can
be. That is most definitely under the purview of the Incubator PMC:
RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC is responsible for
providing guidance and ensuring that subprojects under its
purview develop products according to the Foundation's
philosophy and guidelines for collaborative development; and be
it further
So who defines this? Think of it this way -- the Incubator is the
executive branch, and the members are the legislators.
> "Wah wah, but that means the PMCs can create unbounded work for us."
> Those
> other PMCs should be participating in the process. If they impose too
> much
> work and the incubation process slows as a result, then they can help
> it
> along (in their own self-interest) by adding their own people to the
> mix.
That's not a fear I have, actually quite the contrary. If that's a
problem we
have then the ASF is probably doing pretty well.
-aaron
who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:31:43AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>...
> > I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry
> > developers originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all
> > new projects were supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK),
> > that's how they got here.
>
> And, perhaps, the role of the Incubator is to place a brake on some
> of the growth. Or, perhaps not (the incubator PMC gets to decide).
> Uncontrolled growth may not be beneficial long-term. But, I've yet
> to see a discussion on how much growth we're willing to handle.
That is absolutely not the role for the Incubator. The Board did not create
it with the idea that it is the decision maker on what belongs at the ASF.
That is up to all of the PMCs. The Incubator is for dealing with their
decisions -- for bringing the code in and ensuring the new community
observes our requirements and ideals.
The Jakarta PMC said "yes, we want it" and now the Incubator is responsible
for dealing with that.
If the HTTPD PMC said "yes, we want mod_whatzit" then the Incubator brings
it into the ASF.
But the Incubator *CANNOT* dictate their ideas of what is or is not "proper"
for the ASF to those other PMCs. Absolutely not. If there is any question
about that, then I'm more than happy to get an official statement from the
Board to that effect.
"Wah wah, but that means the PMCs can create unbounded work for us." Those
other PMCs should be participating in the process. If they impose too much
work and the incubation process slows as a result, then they can help it
along (in their own self-interest) by adding their own people to the mix.
Cheers,
-g
--
gstein@apache.org ... ASF Chairman ... http://www.apache.org/
Incubator to handle adoptions, WAS: RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:jerenkrantz@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 1:32 PM
>> enter through the Incubator. ". To me that sounds like the
>> incubator's job is to handle adoptions.
>
> I happen to disagree. Feel free to disagree. -- justin
Given the current resolution the Incubator is where all projects
come through when entering the ASF. Be it new ones, donations,
adoptions etc. This is, in case of adoptions, to see if it is
viable (for both ends) to adopt, and, if so, to verify if the
community of the adopted project is healthy (with respect to ASF
rules/guidelines).
Sander
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org> wrote on 05/01/2003 11:31:43
PM:
> --On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:09 PM +1100 dion@multitask.com.au
> wrote:
[snip]
> Do we really see that our community is stagnating? I'm perfectly
> fine with not achieving global domination. If it means that we're
> not accepting every project that comes our way, so be it. People are
> free to do their own thing elsewhere. We can be choosy.
I'm happy with the ASF being choosy. At the moment I can't tell choosy
from 'refuse anything established externally' though, as this is the first
project to go to the incubator and my first exposure to it.
[snip]
> > A rhetorical question: 'What can the ASF offer any of it's existing
> > projects?'. If project structure were all it were about, most
> > developers wouldn't be here.
>
> Community.
Exactly. So shouldn't the existing 'community' decide?
[snip]
> > And how is that achieved? It seems like 'from within' is a dead-end
> > road, since we are a limited resource without external people and
> > code. So that leaves outside people, but no 'outside' code that
> > can be added?
>
> I think you underestimate the creativity of the people we already
> have and the communities we already have.
Well, you'd be wrong :) I definitely don't understimate the people we
already have, but know that there's a finite number of them and they can't
possibly keep growing code and do a good job of maintaining and supporting
it without extra resource.
[snip]
> And, perhaps, the role of the Incubator is to place a brake on some
> of the growth. Or, perhaps not (the incubator PMC gets to decide).
Yep.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:09 PM +1100 dion@multitask.com.au
wrote:
> I don't think that there are any foregone conclusions wrt Tapestry.
> They've put forward a proposal, various people in the Jakarta
> project were enthusiastic and hence it's come to the incubator.
> What happens from here is a complete unknown.
That depends. I believe Sam said in a thread that he just hoped that
the lack of comment meant that it was okay to add it to Jakarta.
> Why not a top-level project? I'd be ok with that as a result.
My impression from Andy and Sam was that they planned on adding it to
Jakarta and that it was a done deal and that they were waiting for
the bureaucracy to file the paperwork. (Sorry to disappoint.)
> How does the ASF grow and maintain it's community? Is it by
> attracting new developers to existing code? Growth from within?
> Isn't acceptance of a project in whole one of the ways of
> strengthening the community?
Do we really see that our community is stagnating? I'm perfectly
fine with not achieving global domination. If it means that we're
not accepting every project that comes our way, so be it. People are
free to do their own thing elsewhere. We can be choosy.
One of the side goals of the incubator should be to publish/codify
ASF policies. This furthers allows people to adopt our policies
outside of the ASF. There should be no restriction to using our
philosophy only within the realm of the ASF.
> A rhetorical question: 'What can the ASF offer any of it's existing
> projects?'. If project structure were all it were about, most
> developers wouldn't be here.
Community.
> I don't think the suggestion has been made that the Tapestry
> developers and users are fed up with Sourceforge. And I agree, the
> infrastructure is no reason, and I don't think it's ever been put
> forward as one.
Andy said that one of the main reasons for accepting Tapestry was
because 'Sourceforge's servers are down half the time, etc.'
> I didn't think you could 'join' the *ASF*? Hence it couldn't
> possibly be a reason.
Erg, I meant the project becoming an ASF project. Not the membership
in the foundation itself.
> And how is that achieved? It seems like 'from within' is a dead-end
> road, since we are a limited resource without external people and
> code. So that leaves outside people, but no 'outside' code that
> can be added?
I think you underestimate the creativity of the people we already
have and the communities we already have.
> I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry
> developers originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all
> new projects were supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK),
> that's how they got here.
And, perhaps, the role of the Incubator is to place a brake on some
of the growth. Or, perhaps not (the incubator PMC gets to decide).
Uncontrolled growth may not be beneficial long-term. But, I've yet
to see a discussion on how much growth we're willing to handle.
> enter through the Incubator. ". To me that sounds like the
> incubator's job is to handle adoptions.
I happen to disagree. Feel free to disagree. -- justin
Re: Feedback from Tapestry developers, WAS: RE: [Tapestry-contrib]
Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
This is an honest request. Could the Incubator PMC go dsicuss and come
up with a set of guidelines and unanswered questions which are not
ASF-internal questions (which you can't reasonably expect them to
answer) then post them here.
I'm confused. I assume they are. This conversation is not starting out
right. Its meandering back into "reorg" questions which I'd prefer not
to see happen rather than addressing *this* project.
So please come back with a clear list of questions FOR the tapestry
committers. I see it as more dIon and my place to *shield* them from
the usual "You can't join because you're too mature. You can't join
because your too immature" stuff and only ask them to answer the
questions which are clear and can be actually be answered.
I view those other "questions" as "opinions on the direction of Apache"
which can only be answered by the person that holds the said opinion.
(I appologize if the tone sounds harsh or horse just how I feel about
these types of discussions)
-Andy
>
>
> Yes, that is the case. Without Incubator in place Tapestry would no
> doubt already be absorbed by Jakarta. Personally I would say that would
> have been a bad thing, since the Jakarta PMC is overloaded as it is.
>
> So, now we are here, Tapestry is considered for incubation. We've kept
> them hanging in limbo for far too long... apologies for that. Now it is
> time for action. And some of us have some questions we'd like to see
> answered by the Tapestry folk.
>
> It would be nice to hear from the Tapestry developers themselves on what
> they expect to gain from becoming an ASF project.
>
> Sander
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Feedback from Tapestry developers, WAS: RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: dion@multitask.com.au [mailto:dion@multitask.com.au]
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:10 PM
> Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org> wrote on 05/01/2003 07:32:50
> PM:
[... very long mail with questions and answers about/pro adoption/incubation
of Tapestry...]
>> To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think
>> we can add substantial value to Tapestry. The word for this list is
>> 'incubator.' This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation.
>
> I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry developers
> originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all new projects were
> supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK), that's how they got here.
Yes, that is the case. Without Incubator in place Tapestry would no
doubt already be absorbed by Jakarta. Personally I would say that would
have been a bad thing, since the Jakarta PMC is overloaded as it is.
So, now we are here, Tapestry is considered for incubation. We've kept
them hanging in limbo for far too long... apologies for that. Now it is
time for action. And some of us have some questions we'd like to see
answered by the Tapestry folk.
It would be nice to hear from the Tapestry developers themselves on what
they expect to gain from becoming an ASF project.
Sander
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org> wrote on 05/01/2003 07:32:50
PM:
> --On Friday, January 3, 2003 8:54 PM -0500 "Howard M. Lewis Ship"
> <hl...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> > Eventually, I'd like to change package names. Yes, that would wipe
> > out history as well. I've already subjected users to this once:
> > renaming com.primix.tapestry.* to net.sf.tapestry*.
> >
> > Renaming to org.apache.tapestry.* would be desirable. I suppose
>
> It seems that Tapestry has done well managing itself - why do they
> want to change that by being a part of the ASF? It seems a foregone
> conclusion that Tapestry should be a part of Jakarta. Why not a
I don't think that there are any foregone conclusions wrt Tapestry.
They've put forward a proposal, various people in the Jakarta project were
enthusiastic and hence it's come to the incubator. What happens from here
is a complete unknown.
> Tapestry top-level project? They've already gone to a 2.1 release
> (or whatever). Why should the Jakarta project increase their
> management burden when they already have problems managing what they
> have?
Why not a top-level project? I'd be ok with that as a result.
> Perhaps the question I'm really trying to ask is: why should the ASF
> accept Tapestry? I know Aaron asked this too, but I believe that the
> responses from Sam and Andy have avoided the question in spectacular
> fashion. I'm just not seeing a compelling reason why the ASF should
> add Tapestry.
How does the ASF grow and maintain it's community? Is it by attracting new
developers to existing code? Growth from within? Isn't acceptance of a
project in whole one of the ways of strengthening the community?
> The fact that they are 'cool guys who will work on other stuff' isn't
> an answer. Having a pet project not part of the ASF shouldn't stop
> them from being involved with any ASF projects. It's all open for
> them to participate. Participating in a non-ASF project doesn't
> forbid you from participating in an ASF project. If they were really
> interested, they should already be participating!
>
> While I'm glad that rearranging the Tapestry project structure to
> follow ours has proven to be a boon for Tapestry, that still doesn't
> seem a compelling reason. In fact, I believe it's less of a reason -
> they've already switched. What can we offer them in addition? They
> already figured it out themselves!
A rhetorical question: 'What can the ASF offer any of it's existing
projects?'. If project structure were all it were about, most developers
wouldn't be here.
> I don't believe our infrastructure is a reason to merit inclusion.
> If we accepted every project that was merely fed up with
> SourceForge's infrastructure, our quality of service would decrease
> severely due to the load. There has to be a compelling argument for
> the foundation to shoulder the burden of hosting a project.
I don't think the suggestion has been made that the Tapestry developers
and users are fed up with Sourceforge. And I agree, the infrastructure is
no reason, and I don't think it's ever been put forward as one.
> A similar argument goes towards extending our brand name to a project
> to increase visibility of it. It's great to have your project be a
> part of the ASF. I'm sure there are lots of projects that would like
> to be a part of the ASF. But, letting everyone join the ASF merely
> dilutes the brand. Therefore, this can't be a reason, either.
I didn't think you could 'join' the *ASF*? Hence it couldn't possibly be a
reason.
> Nor do I agree with the fact that there is project synergy with other
> ASF projects is a reason for inclusion. I could say that about lots
> of other open source projects that we're not responsible for. Not
> all projects under an ASF-style license have to be part of the ASF.
> Nor do all implementations of a specific class of product have to be
> found at the ASF. The goal of the ASF isn't to house every open
> source project or to build a product line. That's SourceForge's
> goal. I believe *our* primary goal is to help develop new
> communities.
And how is that achieved? It seems like 'from within' is a dead-end road,
since we are a limited resource without external people and code. So that
leaves outside people, but no 'outside' code that can be added?
> To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think
> we can add substantial value to Tapestry. The word for this list is
> 'incubator.' This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation.
I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry developers
originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all new projects were
supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK), that's how they got here.
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Sunday, January 5, 2003 10:44 PM +1100 Jeff Turner
<je...@apache.org> wrote:
> The way I see it:
>
> Sourceforge = Thousands of projects, many good, but most bad
> Apache = Good projects which (in addition) follow ASF-style,
> community-oriented development patterns.
Any project is free to follow our style of development. The ASF need
only be a home to some of them. Given that we have a limited number
of resources, do we really have to be a home to every project that
follows our patterns?
>> goal. I believe *our* primary goal is to help develop new
>> communities.
>
> Depends on if '*our*' mean the Incubator or Apache.
ASF in general. -- justin
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 12:32:50AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
...
> A similar argument goes towards extending our brand name to a project
> to increase visibility of it. It's great to have your project be a
> part of the ASF. I'm sure there are lots of projects that would like
> to be a part of the ASF. But, letting everyone join the ASF merely
> dilutes the brand.
Or strengthens it. Which is the whole point..
The way I see it:
Sourceforge = Thousands of projects, many good, but most bad
Apache = Good projects which (in addition) follow ASF-style,
community-oriented development patterns.
The problem is that Apache-the-seal-of-quality is mixed up with
Apache-the-infrastructure-provider and Apache-the-legal-umbrella. If the
Tapestry crowd aren't unhappy with SF hosting, and don't require legal
protection, why not just 'symlink' them into Jakarta by adding them to
jakarta-site2/index.xml?
> Nor do I agree with the fact that there is project synergy with other
> ASF projects is a reason for inclusion. I could say that about lots
> of other open source projects that we're not responsible for. Not
> all projects under an ASF-style license have to be part of the ASF.
> Nor do all implementations of a specific class of product have to be
> found at the ASF. The goal of the ASF isn't to house every open
> source project or to build a product line. That's SourceForge's
> goal. I believe *our* primary goal is to help develop new
> communities.
Depends on if '*our*' mean the Incubator or Apache.
> To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think
> we can add substantial value to Tapestry. The word for this list is
> 'incubator.' This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation.
Indeed. Having mature projects go through an incubator seems rather
condescending and pointless. If they're good enough, make'em top-level.
If they're not, what's wrong with Sourceforge?
--Jeff
> If someone has a compelling argument for addition, I'd like to hear
> it. But, I must say that I haven't seen one yet. -- justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Sander Striker wrote:
>>From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:acoliver@apache.org]
>>Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 2:53 PM
>
>
> [...]
>
>>When Tapestry was originally submitted to Jakarta (months ago) it was
>>felt that they needed our help adopting a meritocracy and less of (as
>>it was put) "benevolent dictatorship". I joined their lists and helped
>>them do that, and now this is being used to exclude them? Yes, I feel
>>this conversation is best decided in a manner that will provide a
>>consistant guideline in the future.
>
>
> Ah, but this is very usefull information. This is a projects asking
> to be adopted because it wants to adopt the ASF ways. Something it
> hadn't been doing before.
>
> Now, at least for me, that answers a great deal of the question of
> what Tapestry thinks it would gain from becoming and ASF project.
>
Furthermore, I went over and joined Tapestry and helped them start the
process which would have been criteria for entry (ASL license,
meritocratic voting rules, other "structural" things). dIon also
volunteered to help.
This process was started prior to the incubator IIRC and hence started
under the old "method".
-Andy
> Sander
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
RE: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:acoliver@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 2:53 PM
[...]
> When Tapestry was originally submitted to Jakarta (months ago) it was
> felt that they needed our help adopting a meritocracy and less of (as
> it was put) "benevolent dictatorship". I joined their lists and helped
> them do that, and now this is being used to exclude them? Yes, I feel
> this conversation is best decided in a manner that will provide a
> consistant guideline in the future.
Ah, but this is very usefull information. This is a projects asking
to be adopted because it wants to adopt the ASF ways. Something it
hadn't been doing before.
Now, at least for me, that answers a great deal of the question of
what Tapestry thinks it would gain from becoming and ASF project.
Sander
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Because they want to be. Some folks in the Apache community would like
them here.
I think there is another discussion in here that would be better
continued on members@apache.org. We are sending an inconsistant message
and conducting a Catch-22 experiment at the same time.
The question "At what level should a project that wishes to join, join".
I feel it is unfair to subject them to it.
When Tapestry was originally submitted to Jakarta (months ago) it was
felt that they needed our help adopting a meritocracy and less of (as
it was put) "benevolent dictatorship". I joined their lists and helped
them do that, and now this is being used to exclude them? Yes, I feel
this conversation is best decided in a manner that will provide a
consistant guideline in the future.
-Andy
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Friday, January 3, 2003 8:54 PM -0500 "Howard M. Lewis Ship"
> <hl...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
>> Eventually, I'd like to change package names. Yes, that would wipe
>> out history as well. I've already subjected users to this once:
>> renaming com.primix.tapestry.* to net.sf.tapestry*.
>>
>> Renaming to org.apache.tapestry.* would be desirable. I suppose
>
>
> It seems that Tapestry has done well managing itself - why do they want
> to change that by being a part of the ASF? It seems a foregone
> conclusion that Tapestry should be a part of Jakarta. Why not a
> Tapestry top-level project? They've already gone to a 2.1 release (or
> whatever). Why should the Jakarta project increase their management
> burden when they already have problems managing what they have?
>
> Perhaps the question I'm really trying to ask is: why should the ASF
> accept Tapestry? I know Aaron asked this too, but I believe that the
> responses from Sam and Andy have avoided the question in spectacular
> fashion. I'm just not seeing a compelling reason why the ASF should add
> Tapestry.
>
> The fact that they are 'cool guys who will work on other stuff' isn't an
> answer. Having a pet project not part of the ASF shouldn't stop them
> from being involved with any ASF projects. It's all open for them to
> participate. Participating in a non-ASF project doesn't forbid you from
> participating in an ASF project. If they were really interested, they
> should already be participating!
>
> While I'm glad that rearranging the Tapestry project structure to follow
> ours has proven to be a boon for Tapestry, that still doesn't seem a
> compelling reason. In fact, I believe it's less of a reason - they've
> already switched. What can we offer them in addition? They already
> figured it out themselves!
>
> I don't believe our infrastructure is a reason to merit inclusion. If we
> accepted every project that was merely fed up with SourceForge's
> infrastructure, our quality of service would decrease severely due to
> the load. There has to be a compelling argument for the foundation to
> shoulder the burden of hosting a project.
>
> A similar argument goes towards extending our brand name to a project to
> increase visibility of it. It's great to have your project be a part of
> the ASF. I'm sure there are lots of projects that would like to be a
> part of the ASF. But, letting everyone join the ASF merely dilutes the
> brand. Therefore, this can't be a reason, either.
>
> Nor do I agree with the fact that there is project synergy with other
> ASF projects is a reason for inclusion. I could say that about lots of
> other open source projects that we're not responsible for. Not all
> projects under an ASF-style license have to be part of the ASF. Nor do
> all implementations of a specific class of product have to be found at
> the ASF. The goal of the ASF isn't to house every open source project
> or to build a product line. That's SourceForge's goal. I believe *our*
> primary goal is to help develop new communities.
>
> To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think we
> can add substantial value to Tapestry. The word for this list is
> 'incubator.' This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation. If
> someone has a compelling argument for addition, I'd like to hear it.
> But, I must say that I haven't seen one yet. -- justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Friday, January 3, 2003 8:54 PM -0500 "Howard M. Lewis Ship"
<hl...@attbi.com> wrote:
> Eventually, I'd like to change package names. Yes, that would wipe
> out history as well. I've already subjected users to this once:
> renaming com.primix.tapestry.* to net.sf.tapestry*.
>
> Renaming to org.apache.tapestry.* would be desirable. I suppose
It seems that Tapestry has done well managing itself - why do they
want to change that by being a part of the ASF? It seems a foregone
conclusion that Tapestry should be a part of Jakarta. Why not a
Tapestry top-level project? They've already gone to a 2.1 release
(or whatever). Why should the Jakarta project increase their
management burden when they already have problems managing what they
have?
Perhaps the question I'm really trying to ask is: why should the ASF
accept Tapestry? I know Aaron asked this too, but I believe that the
responses from Sam and Andy have avoided the question in spectacular
fashion. I'm just not seeing a compelling reason why the ASF should
add Tapestry.
The fact that they are 'cool guys who will work on other stuff' isn't
an answer. Having a pet project not part of the ASF shouldn't stop
them from being involved with any ASF projects. It's all open for
them to participate. Participating in a non-ASF project doesn't
forbid you from participating in an ASF project. If they were really
interested, they should already be participating!
While I'm glad that rearranging the Tapestry project structure to
follow ours has proven to be a boon for Tapestry, that still doesn't
seem a compelling reason. In fact, I believe it's less of a reason -
they've already switched. What can we offer them in addition? They
already figured it out themselves!
I don't believe our infrastructure is a reason to merit inclusion.
If we accepted every project that was merely fed up with
SourceForge's infrastructure, our quality of service would decrease
severely due to the load. There has to be a compelling argument for
the foundation to shoulder the burden of hosting a project.
A similar argument goes towards extending our brand name to a project
to increase visibility of it. It's great to have your project be a
part of the ASF. I'm sure there are lots of projects that would like
to be a part of the ASF. But, letting everyone join the ASF merely
dilutes the brand. Therefore, this can't be a reason, either.
Nor do I agree with the fact that there is project synergy with other
ASF projects is a reason for inclusion. I could say that about lots
of other open source projects that we're not responsible for. Not
all projects under an ASF-style license have to be part of the ASF.
Nor do all implementations of a specific class of product have to be
found at the ASF. The goal of the ASF isn't to house every open
source project or to build a product line. That's SourceForge's
goal. I believe *our* primary goal is to help develop new
communities.
To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think
we can add substantial value to Tapestry. The word for this list is
'incubator.' This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation.
If someone has a compelling argument for addition, I'd like to hear
it. But, I must say that I haven't seen one yet. -- justin
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
"Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com> wrote on 04/01/2003 12:54:42 PM:
> Eventually, I'd like to change package names. Yes, that would wipe out
> history as well. I've already subjected users to this once: renaming
> com.primix.tapestry.* to net.sf.tapestry*.
>
> Renaming to org.apache.tapestry.* would be desirable. I suppose doing
it
> sooner rather than later is good, because there's a project afoot to
create
> a tapestry component repository, and that will be a nightmare if there
are
> two competing, incompatible code bases.
Yep. Much cleaner with one stable cut.
> Our main problem is that the source code repository is anything but
> quiescent right now; we're trying to close down the 2.3 release (in the
> HEAD) while forging onward with lots of 2.4 work. 2.3 will be the last
> release on SF (in fact, 2.3 GA may be on Incubator/Jakarta).
>
> I'm very concerned about losing work at this point. If we move
repositories
> or rename packages, we may lose the ability to apply a CVS patch.
But that's going to be the same regardless of when you make the move.
[snip other stuff].
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
Eventually, I'd like to change package names. Yes, that would wipe out
history as well. I've already subjected users to this once: renaming
com.primix.tapestry.* to net.sf.tapestry*.
Renaming to org.apache.tapestry.* would be desirable. I suppose doing it
sooner rather than later is good, because there's a project afoot to create
a tapestry component repository, and that will be a nightmare if there are
two competing, incompatible code bases.
Our main problem is that the source code repository is anything but
quiescent right now; we're trying to close down the 2.3 release (in the
HEAD) while forging onward with lots of 2.4 work. 2.3 will be the last
release on SF (in fact, 2.3 GA may be on Incubator/Jakarta).
I'm very concerned about losing work at this point. If we move repositories
or rename packages, we may lose the ability to apply a CVS patch.
If it was just my branch, the problem would be more tractable; I would
simply merge in a few changes from the 2.3 code into my branch ... we could
even do renames and reoganization and check in my branch to Jakarta as
org.apache.tapestry.*/1.1.
Alas, Mind Bridge has his own set of changes in his branch.
I've never tried this, but ... we could create a new branch off of head,
let's call it "incubator". I could attempt to move my changes to the
incubator branch, then Mind Bridge could do the same. We could then rename
packages to org.apache and use that as the image to commit to a Jakarta
repository.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Ruby" <ru...@intertwingly.net>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>; <hl...@attbi.com>
Cc: "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>; "Tapestry Contrib"
<ta...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
> Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
> >
> > Do we start clean, or do we transfer our CVS repository from SourceForge
to
> > Jakarta?
>
> Are you planning on changing your class names to org.apache.*?
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>.
On Friday, January 3, 2003, at 08:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
>> Do we start clean, or do we transfer our CVS repository from
>> SourceForge to
>> Jakarta?
>
> Are you planning on changing your class names to org.apache.*?
>
> - Sam Ruby
I found it notable that the W3 has one of it's only three "fundamental
design principles" (all of which it claims to have inherited from the
Internet)...
"3. Decentralization: Decentralization is without a doubt the newest
principle and most difficult to apply. To allow the Web to "scale" to
worldwide proportions while resisting errors and breakdowns, the
architecture(like the Internet) must limit or eliminate dependencies on
central registries."
I wonder if collectively apache.org might prefer to adopt - on
principle - that class names be less decentralized. But that, like
Sam's query, is a question for another day... I think?
- ben
ps. I'm becoming terrible addicted to www.bartleby.com
"Architecture might be more sportive and varied if every man built his
own house, but it would not be the art and science that we have made
it; and while every woman prepares food for her own family, cooking can
never rise beyond the level of the amateur’s work."
- Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860–1935), U.S. author and feminist.
Perkins favored the centralization and professionalization of much
housework, both to improve its quality and (more importantly) to free
women for other pursuits.
-- via
http://www.bartleby.com/cgi-bin/texis/webinator/
sitesearch?FILTER=&query=centralization
Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
>
> Do we start clean, or do we transfer our CVS repository from SourceForge to
> Jakarta?
Are you planning on changing your class names to org.apache.*?
- Sam Ruby