You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com> on 2005/12/20 20:16:13 UTC
Incubating java projects
Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
the org.apache package?
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
Right - I would assume you provide some kind of adapter package so
existing code works, and deprecate it...
On Dec 20, 2005, at 5:12 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Of course, the answer may not be that simple if you have an existing
> user base that programs against your APIs.
>
> I think it would be wise to do this as soon as possible and judge the
> impact. We found we had to write a couple of compatibility interfaces
> under the old package scheme to retain binary compatbility, while
> requiring those upgrading to change package names.
>
> - Brett
>
> On 12/21/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes :)
>>
>> -- dims
>>
>> On 12/20/05, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project
>>> move to
>>> the org.apache package?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>.
Of course, the answer may not be that simple if you have an existing
user base that programs against your APIs.
I think it would be wise to do this as soon as possible and judge the
impact. We found we had to write a couple of compatibility interfaces
under the old package scheme to retain binary compatbility, while
requiring those upgrading to change package names.
- Brett
On 12/21/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes :)
>
> -- dims
>
> On 12/20/05, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> > Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
> > the org.apache package?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Incubating java projects
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Yes :)
-- dims
On 12/20/05, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
> the org.apache package?
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 21 Dec 2005, at 11:22, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On 12/21/05, James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
>> name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
>> is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
>> need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
>> mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
>> decision and why?
>
> Managing additional domains is most possibly a burden for infra.
They don't have to manage them at all - its nothing to do with
infrastructure, purely to do with Java class names and a mechanism to
avoid clashes.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 12/21/05, James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
> name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
> is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
> need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
> mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
> decision and why?
Managing additional domains is most possibly a burden for infra.
Jochen
--
Often it does seem a pity that Noah and his party did not miss the
boat. (Mark Twain)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Dec 21, 2005, at 6:40 AM, James Strachan wrote:
>
>
>
>> I think the package name change is currently not mandatory, but
>> perhaps
>> it should be.
>
> I'm not so sure. There's already various stuff at Apache that
> breaks this rule (SAX, DOM, JCP APIs such as stuff in geronimo-
> spec, the SCA specification in the Tuscany project; I'm sure there
> are other examples, this was off the top of my head). Seems a bit
> silly to introduce a new rule that we can't ever fully comply with
> for no technical reason.
To be clear, the other namespaces are required by specs (SAX, DOM,
J2EE, SCA...) its not a choice.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 21 Dec 2005, at 11:13, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:59:11AM +0000, James Strachan wrote:
>> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>> It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
>>> took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
>>> the need to codify it...
>>
>> Yeah - I've never seen it actually written down anywhere & noticed
>> that the Roller project hadn't switched domains yet.
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/roller/trunk/src/org/
>>
>> I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
>> name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
>> is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
>> need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
>> mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
>> decision and why?
>
> Sun Microsystems in their coding standards :-). It was in retrospect
> not such a good idea perhaps...
Suns coding standards wasn't my question - it was whether or not
"org.apache." should be a mandatory prefix on all Java package names
at Apache.
> One thing we *can't* have is trademarks that aren't owned by the ASF
> (registered or not),
I didn't think trademarks are linked to Java package names are they?
> so *if* the package isn't changed then yes the
> org.roller name and domain *should* probably come under full
> control of
> the ASF (I'll say that's a good idea anyway).
Agreed
> I think the package name change is currently not mandatory, but
> perhaps
> it should be.
I'm not so sure. There's already various stuff at Apache that breaks
this rule (SAX, DOM, JCP APIs such as stuff in geronimo-spec, the SCA
specification in the Tuscany project; I'm sure there are other
examples, this was off the top of my head). Seems a bit silly to
introduce a new rule that we can't ever fully comply with for no
technical reason.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On 12/21/2005 3:13 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:59:11AM +0000, James Strachan wrote:
>
>
>>On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
>>>took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
>>>the need to codify it...
>>>
>>>
>>Yeah - I've never seen it actually written down anywhere & noticed
>>that the Roller project hadn't switched domains yet.
>>
>>https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/roller/trunk/src/org/
>>
>>I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
>>name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
>>is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
>>need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
>>mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
>>decision and why?
>>
>>
>
>Sun Microsystems in their coding standards :-). It was in retrospect
>not such a good idea perhaps...
>
>One thing we *can't* have is trademarks that aren't owned by the ASF
>(registered or not), so *if* the package isn't changed then yes the
>org.roller name and domain *should* probably come under full control of
>the ASF (I'll say that's a good idea anyway).
>
>I think the package name change is currently not mandatory, but perhaps
>it should be.
>
>
FWIW, ActiveMQ and ServiceMix are currently in the process of being
transfered.
Regards,
Alan
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:59:11AM +0000, James Strachan wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
> >took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
> >the need to codify it...
>
> Yeah - I've never seen it actually written down anywhere & noticed
> that the Roller project hadn't switched domains yet.
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/roller/trunk/src/org/
>
> I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
> name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
> is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
> need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
> mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
> decision and why?
Sun Microsystems in their coding standards :-). It was in retrospect
not such a good idea perhaps...
One thing we *can't* have is trademarks that aren't owned by the ASF
(registered or not), so *if* the package isn't changed then yes the
org.roller name and domain *should* probably come under full control of
the ASF (I'll say that's a good idea anyway).
I think the package name change is currently not mandatory, but perhaps
it should be.
- LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>.
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 18:02 +0000, James Strachan wrote:
> Dims could you please give us a bit of time to get ServiceMix's house
> in order first before we can start collaborating with other projects
> in earnest. Don't worry there will be collaboration.
+1!
Sanjiva.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 21 Dec 2005, at 14:42, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> James,
>
> Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
> standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
> judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
> start a VOTE on pmc@incubator. I think you are part of that as well.
>
> I did bring up issues on the pmc@geronimo mailing lists and we
> resolved it. As to "related-ness". I'd even be ok with ActiveMQ as a
> TLP or ServiceMix as a TLP.
Those are options we can explore in the future; for now the ActiveMQ
and ServiceMix teams are more than happy with Geronimo as the
sponsoring PMC.
> But it does not seem right to be part of
> Geronimo as a sub project.
I disagree. ActiveMQ is a core piece of Geronimo and one of the core
dependencies of ServiceMix; ServiceMix also makes heavy use of XBean
and other Geronimo features (JTA, JCA) together with being integrated
into Geronimo. So apart from community overlap there is currently a
greater technical dependency between ServiceMix and Geronimo than
ServiceMIx and WS. Though that doesn't mean ServiceMix will not work
with other WS projects - e.g. we're already using Axis in ServiceMix.
I'm sure there will be some Tuscany <-> ServiceMIx collaboration soon
and I'm interested in seeing a Synapse <-> ServiceMix bridge of some
kind as well.
> I'd prefer ServiceMix folks to work more
> closely with WS folks or even move to WS-land. But that's another
> story.
Sure - we know - you've said this before and it'll happen. I don't
think the sponsor PMC or whether or not ServiceMix is a TLP or part
of Geronimo or WS is gonna change that too much.
> FYI, am and Guillaume Nodet did work during the hackathon on
> some stuff. But i'd like to see more closer cooperation.
See - already moving ServiceMix to Apache has led to some new
collaboration that might not have happened otherwise :)
> Especially
> for items that you need and those that affect Geronimo like JAX-WS
> 2.0/JAXB. It's not like we want all ws stuff to be in ws pmc.
I thought you just said you wanted ServiceMix to move to WS :)
> JSR 181
> in Beehive and WSRP4J in portals are good examples of sister projects
> that still work closely with Axis dev folks.
>
> Also, what does "community" means? does it mean existing folks who are
> working on the projects already at codehaus? Especially when Syanpse
> and Axis are mentioned in the proposal and we don't see anyone show up
> on the dev mailing lists, it's just fishy to say the least.
Dims could you please give us a bit of time to get ServiceMix's house
in order first before we can start collaborating with other projects
in earnest. Don't worry there will be collaboration.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 21 Dec 2005, at 16:45, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Dan,
>
> Then at least the proposal should be honest enough, not to name names.
> If we don't know what ServiceMix's needs are, we cannot make sure the
> design of Synapse will fit right with ServiceMix. No one is asking for
> a code drop. Asking for involvement, i think that's what a community
> means. getting involved. SM did not have to come into Apache to
> increase cooperation. It could have been done before.
>
> Why talk publicly about strong ties to Tuscany/Synapse in public
> forums and blogs (example -
> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=38049) when
> there is no intention in the field to community building aspects?
Just because its not happened yet doesn't mean the intention is not
there.
Would it make you happier if we took the names of projects we'd like
to collaborate with from the proposal until that collaboration
actually starts?
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Dan,
Then at least the proposal should be honest enough, not to name names.
If we don't know what ServiceMix's needs are, we cannot make sure the
design of Synapse will fit right with ServiceMix. No one is asking for
a code drop. Asking for involvement, i think that's what a community
means. getting involved. SM did not have to come into Apache to
increase cooperation. It could have been done before.
Why talk publicly about strong ties to Tuscany/Synapse in public
forums and blogs (example -
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=38049) when
there is no intention in the field to community building aspects? BTW,
Here at Apache community building involves hanging out on mailing
lists *NOT* IRC. I can point you to several folks who have strong
reservations about IRC usage in certain projects.
Thanks,
dims
On 12/21/05, Dan Diephouse <da...@envoisolutions.com> wrote:
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > James,
> >
> > Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
> > standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
> > judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
> > start a VOTE on pmc@incubator. I think you are part of that as well.
> >
> > I did bring up issues on the pmc@geronimo mailing lists and we
> > resolved it. As to "related-ness". I'd even be ok with ActiveMQ as a
> > TLP or ServiceMix as a TLP. But it does not seem right to be part of
> > Geronimo as a sub project. I'd prefer ServiceMix folks to work more
> > closely with WS folks or even move to WS-land. But that's another
> > story. FYI, am and Guillaume Nodet did work during the hackathon on
> > some stuff. But i'd like to see more closer cooperation. Especially
> > for items that you need and those that affect Geronimo like JAX-WS
> > 2.0/JAXB. It's not like we want all ws stuff to be in ws pmc. JSR 181
> > in Beehive and WSRP4J in portals are good examples of sister projects
> > that still work closely with Axis dev folks.
> >
> > Also, what does "community" means? does it mean existing folks who are
> > working on the projects already at codehaus? Especially when Syanpse
> > and Axis are mentioned in the proposal and we don't see anyone show up
> > on the dev mailing lists, it's just fishy to say the least. FYI, this
> > is not the first time i had to do this. I did this with beehive too.
> > See my post in Oct 2004 articulating the same concerns with beehive.
> >
> First, I don't know what you are expecting regarding Syanpse and Axis.
> Synapse hasn't even done a milestone yet so there isn't much to
> integrate with JBI. Axis 2 has done mile stones but enough people are
> using it yet for the SM team to spend their time on it. And I think if
> you'll look closely it is already possible to work with Axis 1.x
> services in SM.
>
> Second, I don't think you can expect SM to come to you and flop a bunch
> of code out there which makes the integration perfect. I originally came
> to the ServiceMix guys with XFire integration and thats how it got
> integrated. That in turn got me involved with ServiceMix and Guillaume
> in turn has helped XFire a little. Its reciprocal.
>
> Also, I hope you aren't implying that ServiceMix has created an
> exclusive community of Codehaus people. I have seen the ServiceMix team
> be more than helpful to myself and to others who joined in both in and
> outside the Codehaus/Apache communitys. In fact, they MUST. ServiceMix's
> job is to not play favorites and integrate with everyone. Why must
> ServiceMix work extra close with the WS PMC? I'm sure when people start
> needing integration with WS-* projects that will happen. Thats how open
> source works right?
>
> Cheers,
>
> - Dan
>
>
> --
> Dan Diephouse
> Envoi Solutions LLC
> http://netzooid.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Dan Diephouse <da...@envoisolutions.com>.
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> James,
>
> Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
> standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
> judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
> start a VOTE on pmc@incubator. I think you are part of that as well.
>
> I did bring up issues on the pmc@geronimo mailing lists and we
> resolved it. As to "related-ness". I'd even be ok with ActiveMQ as a
> TLP or ServiceMix as a TLP. But it does not seem right to be part of
> Geronimo as a sub project. I'd prefer ServiceMix folks to work more
> closely with WS folks or even move to WS-land. But that's another
> story. FYI, am and Guillaume Nodet did work during the hackathon on
> some stuff. But i'd like to see more closer cooperation. Especially
> for items that you need and those that affect Geronimo like JAX-WS
> 2.0/JAXB. It's not like we want all ws stuff to be in ws pmc. JSR 181
> in Beehive and WSRP4J in portals are good examples of sister projects
> that still work closely with Axis dev folks.
>
> Also, what does "community" means? does it mean existing folks who are
> working on the projects already at codehaus? Especially when Syanpse
> and Axis are mentioned in the proposal and we don't see anyone show up
> on the dev mailing lists, it's just fishy to say the least. FYI, this
> is not the first time i had to do this. I did this with beehive too.
> See my post in Oct 2004 articulating the same concerns with beehive.
>
First, I don't know what you are expecting regarding Syanpse and Axis.
Synapse hasn't even done a milestone yet so there isn't much to
integrate with JBI. Axis 2 has done mile stones but enough people are
using it yet for the SM team to spend their time on it. And I think if
you'll look closely it is already possible to work with Axis 1.x
services in SM.
Second, I don't think you can expect SM to come to you and flop a bunch
of code out there which makes the integration perfect. I originally came
to the ServiceMix guys with XFire integration and thats how it got
integrated. That in turn got me involved with ServiceMix and Guillaume
in turn has helped XFire a little. Its reciprocal.
Also, I hope you aren't implying that ServiceMix has created an
exclusive community of Codehaus people. I have seen the ServiceMix team
be more than helpful to myself and to others who joined in both in and
outside the Codehaus/Apache communitys. In fact, they MUST. ServiceMix's
job is to not play favorites and integrate with everyone. Why must
ServiceMix work extra close with the WS PMC? I'm sure when people start
needing integration with WS-* projects that will happen. Thats how open
source works right?
Cheers,
- Dan
--
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
James,
Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
start a VOTE on pmc@incubator. I think you are part of that as well.
I did bring up issues on the pmc@geronimo mailing lists and we
resolved it. As to "related-ness". I'd even be ok with ActiveMQ as a
TLP or ServiceMix as a TLP. But it does not seem right to be part of
Geronimo as a sub project. I'd prefer ServiceMix folks to work more
closely with WS folks or even move to WS-land. But that's another
story. FYI, am and Guillaume Nodet did work during the hackathon on
some stuff. But i'd like to see more closer cooperation. Especially
for items that you need and those that affect Geronimo like JAX-WS
2.0/JAXB. It's not like we want all ws stuff to be in ws pmc. JSR 181
in Beehive and WSRP4J in portals are good examples of sister projects
that still work closely with Axis dev folks.
Also, what does "community" means? does it mean existing folks who are
working on the projects already at codehaus? Especially when Syanpse
and Axis are mentioned in the proposal and we don't see anyone show up
on the dev mailing lists, it's just fishy to say the least. FYI, this
is not the first time i had to do this. I did this with beehive too.
See my post in Oct 2004 articulating the same concerns with beehive.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/beehive-dev/200410.mbox/%3c4B2B4C417991364996F035E1EE39E2E10221583B@uskiex01.bea.com%3e
thanks for listening,
dims
On 12/21/05, James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 21 Dec 2005, at 13:02, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > James,
> >
> > To be blunt, what is being done here? here's what i see as a casual
> > observer to the infra list.
> >
> > - A bunch of projects are getting into Apache controlled by the same
> > set of people (ServiceMix/ActiveMQ/XBean/WADI)
>
> Not really; see the committer lists, they are all quite different.
> But sure there's a bunch of existing apache developers who work on
> some of those projects along with other Apache projects too.
>
>
> > - Folks are getting completely unrelated projects into an umbrella
> > project "Geronimo"
>
> If anything is this an issue for Geronimo PMC not the incubator. Why
> have you not brought this up there as you are a member of the PMC?
>
>
> > - Folks involved want everything under the sun to be supported by
> > infra folks
>
> Huh? So far the ServiceMix & ActiveMQ teams have only asked for
> subversion & mail :)
>
>
> > - Folks dont want to use incubator.apache.org as the mailing list
> > domain
>
> See the other thread for that - the arguments for and against have
> been fairly well articulated.
>
>
> > - Folks dont want to even change their package name
>
> I'm just asking an honest question here - I've already said, if there
> really is a rule we'll follow it. I just want to know is there a rule
> and if there is why does it exist.
>
>
> > - Folks just want to do what they want to do regardless of precedent
>
> Hardly - this is why we're asking for guidance on the incubator list
> to see what we should do.
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 21 Dec 2005, at 13:02, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> James,
>
> To be blunt, what is being done here? here's what i see as a casual
> observer to the infra list.
>
> - A bunch of projects are getting into Apache controlled by the same
> set of people (ServiceMix/ActiveMQ/XBean/WADI)
Not really; see the committer lists, they are all quite different.
But sure there's a bunch of existing apache developers who work on
some of those projects along with other Apache projects too.
> - Folks are getting completely unrelated projects into an umbrella
> project "Geronimo"
If anything is this an issue for Geronimo PMC not the incubator. Why
have you not brought this up there as you are a member of the PMC?
> - Folks involved want everything under the sun to be supported by
> infra folks
Huh? So far the ServiceMix & ActiveMQ teams have only asked for
subversion & mail :)
> - Folks dont want to use incubator.apache.org as the mailing list
> domain
See the other thread for that - the arguments for and against have
been fairly well articulated.
> - Folks dont want to even change their package name
I'm just asking an honest question here - I've already said, if there
really is a rule we'll follow it. I just want to know is there a rule
and if there is why does it exist.
> - Folks just want to do what they want to do regardless of precedent
Hardly - this is why we're asking for guidance on the incubator list
to see what we should do.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
James,
To be blunt, what is being done here? here's what i see as a casual
observer to the infra list.
- A bunch of projects are getting into Apache controlled by the same
set of people (ServiceMix/ActiveMQ/XBean/WADI)
- Folks are getting completely unrelated projects into an umbrella
project "Geronimo"
- Folks involved want everything under the sun to be supported by infra folks
- Folks dont want to use incubator.apache.org as the mailing list domain
- Folks dont want to even change their package name
- Folks just want to do what they want to do regardless of precedent
Where is this heading? I am afraid to ask.
thanks,
dims
On 12/21/05, James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
> > took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
> > the need to codify it...
>
> Yeah - I've never seen it actually written down anywhere & noticed
> that the Roller project hadn't switched domains yet.
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/roller/trunk/src/org/
>
> I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
> name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
> is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
> need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
> mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
> decision and why?
>
> James
>
>
> > On Dec 20, 2005, at 2:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> >
> >> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project
> >> move to the org.apache package?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Alan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> > geirm@apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Incubating java projects
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
James Strachan wrote:
> I don't see why we need to force a major package name
> change on our users.
Branding and consistency. A wrapper package can be used to deprecate the
old names.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
> took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
> the need to codify it...
Yeah - I've never seen it actually written down anywhere & noticed
that the Roller project hadn't switched domains yet.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/roller/trunk/src/org/
I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache) I don't see why we
need to force a major package name change on our users. If it is
mandatory then hey we'll comply I'm just questioning who made this
decision and why?
James
> On Dec 20, 2005, at 2:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project
>> move to the org.apache package?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always took
for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had the
need to codify it...
On Dec 20, 2005, at 2:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move
> to the org.apache package?
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Hehe. cross checked the ACL's. James should be able to update any
incubator document we have :)
-- dims
On 12/22/05, robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/22/05, James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Thanks everyone for your comments. We should maybe capture some of
> > the points raised in this thread into the incubation guide?
>
> +1
>
> submit a patch ;)
>
> (been waiting years to say that to james)
>
> AUIU the consensus seems to be that the documentation needs lots of
> work so i don't think anyone would have any objections to you diving
> in (would they?)
>
> - robert
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 12/22/05, James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> Thanks everyone for your comments. We should maybe capture some of
> the points raised in this thread into the incubation guide?
+1
submit a patch ;)
(been waiting years to say that to james)
AUIU the consensus seems to be that the documentation needs lots of
work so i don't think anyone would have any objections to you diving
in (would they?)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
On 22 Dec 2005, at 06:36, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 19:47 -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project
>>> move to
>>> the org.apache package?
>>
>> I would say "yes".
>
> Big +1.
>
> We of course cannot control standard APIs like org.w3c.dom, or javax.*
> etc., but for software that is developed at Apache the Java packaging
> should always be org.apache.*. IMO that's the signal to the world of
> Java programmers that they're using ASF code and its a valuable signal
> that we must not lose.
>
> "Hurting" current users with the change cost is a good thing in this
> case IMO: that way they too realize that there's a big change in the
> project and that its now an ASF project.
Great point Sanjiva - am completely sold now, many thanks. Package
renaming for ActiveMQ and ServiceMix coming up real soon....
Thanks everyone for your comments. We should maybe capture some of
the points raised in this thread into the incubation guide?
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>.
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 19:47 -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> > Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
> > the org.apache package?
>
> I would say "yes".
Big +1.
We of course cannot control standard APIs like org.w3c.dom, or javax.*
etc., but for software that is developed at Apache the Java packaging
should always be org.apache.*. IMO that's the signal to the world of
Java programmers that they're using ASF code and its a valuable signal
that we must not lose.
"Hurting" current users with the change cost is a good thing in this
case IMO: that way they too realize that there's a big change in the
project and that its now an ASF project.
Sanjiva.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Incubating java projects
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Greg Stein wrote:
> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> > Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating
> > project move to the org.apache package?
> I would say "yes".
As would (and did) most others. We should add this to the Incubation
checklist. I don't want to see another mistake made as was apparently made
with iBatis.
And, as Jim noted, this should go into the Incubation Guide.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating java projects
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
> the org.apache package?
I would say "yes".
Consider five years down the road. The pre-Incubator life of a project
is a distant memory at that point. You're going to confuse the heck
out of users if the namespace is *not* org.apache.
I believe that an incoming project better have a *very* strong
rationale for sticking to their pre-Apache namespace. A reason that
can last five years. Ten years.
An example for consideration: "It will hurt our users" is valid, but
how many and how badly will it hurt them? Can projects that use the
old namespace just stick to the old codebase? If they want new stuff,
then couldn't they just update their references?
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org