Commons Mission -- Proposing Serf as a Commons project

[Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>]

I suspect that the non-APR folk on this list are having a hard time
grokking what Serf is and how it fits into the murky undefined ether of
Commons. Would the proponents of this move be so kind as to make their
case before this group?


(I will try to post a clearer and less policy-based proposal akin to
my "HTTP Utilities Container" proposal that was mentioned earlier last
week, since I believe this sort of a container will foster both cross-
language contributions and quality reusable libraries that are focused
on a functional goal (making HTTP Utilities). I would like to hear what
others think about this and how they see these various HTTP libraries
and projects working together and how Commons is a proper parent for
these sorts of collaborations.)

-aaron

Re: Commons Mission -- Proposing Serf as a Commons project

[Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>]

--On Monday, November 4, 2002 12:16 PM -0800 Aaron Bannert 
<aa...@clove.org> wrote:

> I suspect that the non-APR folk on this list are having a hard time
> grokking what Serf is and how it fits into the murky undefined
> ether of Commons. Would the proponents of this move be so kind as
> to make their case before this group?

Um, we've gone over this before and I stated here on general@commons 
why Serf belongs in Commons, who the key players are, and what the 
proposed development plan is.  I'm not about to repeat myself.

Please reread <2147483647.1035498085@[10.0.1.17]>.

(Heh.  I like Mulberry's Message-IDs.)

> (I will try to post a clearer and less policy-based proposal akin to
> my "HTTP Utilities Container" proposal that was mentioned earlier
> last week, since I believe this sort of a container will foster
> both cross- language contributions and quality reusable libraries
> that are focused on a functional goal (making HTTP Utilities). I
> would like to hear what others think about this and how they see
> these various HTTP libraries and projects working together and how
> Commons is a proper parent for these sorts of collaborations.)

Again, I don't think that Commons should have 'container' components. 
If the projects within Commons want to collaborate, then fine, but 
that's not something that the we need to mandate.  Encourage, 
perhaps, but nothing formal.  Sander made an excellent point earlier:

> No, the people in the community make it civilized, not the rules.

Likewise, if the people in the community want to collaborate, they 
can and probably will, but we shouldn't force groups to play together 
if they don't want to in the first place.  It's not the PMC's job to 
play babysitter.  -- justin