You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@ws.apache.org by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> on 2010/10/17 22:54:36 UTC

[VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

I hope no one will be offended by offering this as a vote right off
the bat, but it seems sort of self-evidently a good idea to me.

I want to move the contents of 'commons' to be direct children of the
ws project in svn. I've already done this to the web site :-)

I think we can leave a readme in 'commons' that explains where they went.

Is Guththila/ live?

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.

I'd call it attic rather than archive for consistency, but I also
won't squeak at archive. Most Def +1.



On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> Agree that we should have webservice/archive  and ws.apache.org/archive
> directory....less clutter the better.
>
> Nadir Amra
> Integrated Web Services for IBM i Operating System
> Internet: amra@us.ibm.com
>
> Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote on 10/18/2010 10:11:54 AM:
>
>> From: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
>> To: general@ws.apache.org
>> Cc: Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>, Benson Margulies
>> <bi...@gmail.com>
>> Date: 10/18/2010 10:13 AM
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion
>>
>> On Monday 18 October 2010 10:04:59 am Glen Daniels wrote:
>> > This isn't a chair-specific thing, no, and thanks for asking Benson!
>> >
>> > I had started drafting up a message to the Attic folks, but just took a
>> > closer look at http://attic.apache.org/process.html - the Attic seems
>> > highly optimized for TLPs and not so much for subprojects.  Also, I
>> > hadn't
>> > realized this but the Attic does not seem to have a separate SVN
>> > repository - rather, it asks the projects to leave their content
>> > in-place
>> > (probably good for limited support of old searches/links/etc) and make
>> > it
>> > read-only.  As such, it may not actually be the best option for our
>> > subprojects.
>> >
>> > Another option for us is to simply move the designated subprojects into
>> > our
>> > own (read-only) archive, to sit alongside soap, pubscribe, etc....  We'd
>> > still shut down the mailing lists (that's happening anyway), make the
>> > appropriate JIRAs read-only, etc.
>> >
>> > What do people think of that notion?  If we're +1 on that idea we can
>> > just
>> > do it.
>>
>> I'm +1, but I DO think that working with the Attic folks is the
>> right thing to
>> do so that the projects get officially  listed there.   Similar to:
>>
>> http://attic.apache.org/projects/jakarta-slide.html
>>
>> and such.
>>
>>
>> > Open question - should we leave at least top-level SVN dirs for the
>> > subprojects that get archived, with a README?  We didn't do this for the
>> > former ones, and it would make our SVN space less "clean", but it might
>> > be
>> > nice for folks looking for the old stuff.  I guess I'd say no, it's easy
>> > enough to find if we update the ws.apache.org page, but what do others
>> > think?
>>
>> I personally would prefer a webservice/archive directory or somthingto
>> stick
>> them in.  Out of sight, out of mind.   Actually, in this case, it's the
>> other
>> way around.   Out of mind, make it out of sight.   :-)   I'd extend this
>> to
>> the web site as well.   Make an "ws.apache.org/archive" area where
>> we dump the
>> attic projects sites so the Attic can point at it.
>>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --Glen
>> >
>> > On 10/18/2010 9:28 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> > > Is this a job for the chair, or could I be helpful by opening the door
>> > > to the Attic?
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >> On 10/18/2010 7:05 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> > >>>> I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue
>> > >>>> to
>> > >>>> have a WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most
>> > >>>> of
>> > >>>> these subprojects.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> OK, but what's the scoop on deleting things that got atticed or
>> > >>> transfered to Axis?
>> > >>
>> > >> The stuff that moved to Axis can/should all be removed.  We still
>> > >> need
>> > >> to ask the Attic folks to suck in WSIF and Muse over there so those
>> > >> should stay until that happens.
>> > >>
>> > >> --Glen
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Kulp
>> dkulp@apache.org
>>
> http://dankulp.com/blog
>

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com>.

+1 

Agree that we should have webservice/archive  and ws.apache.org/archive 
directory....less clutter the better. 

Nadir Amra
Integrated Web Services for IBM i Operating System
Internet: amra@us.ibm.com

Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote on 10/18/2010 10:11:54 AM:

> From: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
> To: general@ws.apache.org
> Cc: Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>, Benson Margulies 
> <bi...@gmail.com>
> Date: 10/18/2010 10:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion
> 
> On Monday 18 October 2010 10:04:59 am Glen Daniels wrote:
> > This isn't a chair-specific thing, no, and thanks for asking Benson!
> > 
> > I had started drafting up a message to the Attic folks, but just took 
a
> > closer look at http://attic.apache.org/process.html - the Attic seems
> > highly optimized for TLPs and not so much for subprojects.  Also, I 
hadn't
> > realized this but the Attic does not seem to have a separate SVN
> > repository - rather, it asks the projects to leave their content 
in-place
> > (probably good for limited support of old searches/links/etc) and make 
it
> > read-only.  As such, it may not actually be the best option for our
> > subprojects.
> > 
> > Another option for us is to simply move the designated subprojects 
into our
> > own (read-only) archive, to sit alongside soap, pubscribe, etc.... 
We'd
> > still shut down the mailing lists (that's happening anyway), make the
> > appropriate JIRAs read-only, etc.
> > 
> > What do people think of that notion?  If we're +1 on that idea we can 
just
> > do it.
> 
> I'm +1, but I DO think that working with the Attic folks is the 
> right thing to 
> do so that the projects get officially  listed there.   Similar to:
> 
> http://attic.apache.org/projects/jakarta-slide.html
> 
> and such.
> 
> 
> > Open question - should we leave at least top-level SVN dirs for the
> > subprojects that get archived, with a README?  We didn't do this for 
the
> > former ones, and it would make our SVN space less "clean", but it 
might be
> > nice for folks looking for the old stuff.  I guess I'd say no, it's 
easy
> > enough to find if we update the ws.apache.org page, but what do others
> > think?
> 
> I personally would prefer a webservice/archive directory or somthingto 
stick 
> them in.  Out of sight, out of mind.   Actually, in this case, it's the 
other 
> way around.   Out of mind, make it out of sight.   :-)   I'd extend this 
to 
> the web site as well.   Make an "ws.apache.org/archive" area where 
> we dump the 
> attic projects sites so the Attic can point at it.
> 
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > --Glen
> > 
> > On 10/18/2010 9:28 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > > Is this a job for the chair, or could I be helpful by opening the 
door
> > > to the Attic?
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Glen Daniels 
<gl...@thoughtcraft.com> 
> wrote:
> > >> On 10/18/2010 7:05 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > >>>> I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue 
to
> > >>>> have a WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most 
of
> > >>>> these subprojects.
> > >>> 
> > >>> OK, but what's the scoop on deleting things that got atticed or
> > >>> transfered to Axis?
> > >> 
> > >> The stuff that moved to Axis can/should all be removed.  We still 
need
> > >> to ask the Attic folks to suck in WSIF and Muse over there so those
> > >> should stay until that happens.
> > >> 
> > >> --Glen
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.

On Monday 18 October 2010 10:04:59 am Glen Daniels wrote:
> This isn't a chair-specific thing, no, and thanks for asking Benson!
> 
> I had started drafting up a message to the Attic folks, but just took a
> closer look at http://attic.apache.org/process.html - the Attic seems
> highly optimized for TLPs and not so much for subprojects.  Also, I hadn't
> realized this but the Attic does not seem to have a separate SVN
> repository - rather, it asks the projects to leave their content in-place
> (probably good for limited support of old searches/links/etc) and make it
> read-only.  As such, it may not actually be the best option for our
> subprojects.
> 
> Another option for us is to simply move the designated subprojects into our
> own (read-only) archive, to sit alongside soap, pubscribe, etc....  We'd
> still shut down the mailing lists (that's happening anyway), make the
> appropriate JIRAs read-only, etc.
> 
> What do people think of that notion?  If we're +1 on that idea we can just
> do it.

I'm +1, but I DO think that working with the Attic folks is the right thing to 
do so that the projects get officially  listed there.   Similar to:

http://attic.apache.org/projects/jakarta-slide.html

and such.


> Open question - should we leave at least top-level SVN dirs for the
> subprojects that get archived, with a README?  We didn't do this for the
> former ones, and it would make our SVN space less "clean", but it might be
> nice for folks looking for the old stuff.  I guess I'd say no, it's easy
> enough to find if we update the ws.apache.org page, but what do others
> think?

I personally would prefer a webservice/archive directory or somthing to stick 
them in.  Out of sight, out of mind.   Actually, in this case, it's the other 
way around.   Out of mind, make it out of sight.   :-)   I'd extend this to 
the web site as well.   Make an "ws.apache.org/archive" area where we dump the 
attic projects sites so the Attic can point at it.


Dan



> 
> Thanks,
> --Glen
> 
> On 10/18/2010 9:28 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > Is this a job for the chair, or could I be helpful by opening the door
> > to the Attic?
> > 
> > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> 
wrote:
> >> On 10/18/2010 7:05 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> >>>> I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue to
> >>>> have a WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most of
> >>>> these subprojects.
> >>> 
> >>> OK, but what's the scoop on deleting things that got atticed or
> >>> transfered to Axis?
> >> 
> >> The stuff that moved to Axis can/should all be removed.  We still need
> >> to ask the Attic folks to suck in WSIF and Muse over there so those
> >> should stay until that happens.
> >> 
> >> --Glen

-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.

This isn't a chair-specific thing, no, and thanks for asking Benson!

I had started drafting up a message to the Attic folks, but just took a
closer look at http://attic.apache.org/process.html - the Attic seems highly
optimized for TLPs and not so much for subprojects.  Also, I hadn't realized
this but the Attic does not seem to have a separate SVN repository - rather,
it asks the projects to leave their content in-place (probably good for
limited support of old searches/links/etc) and make it read-only.  As such,
it may not actually be the best option for our subprojects.

Another option for us is to simply move the designated subprojects into our
own (read-only) archive, to sit alongside soap, pubscribe, etc....  We'd
still shut down the mailing lists (that's happening anyway), make the
appropriate JIRAs read-only, etc.

What do people think of that notion?  If we're +1 on that idea we can just do it.

Open question - should we leave at least top-level SVN dirs for the
subprojects that get archived, with a README?  We didn't do this for the
former ones, and it would make our SVN space less "clean", but it might be
nice for folks looking for the old stuff.  I guess I'd say no, it's easy
enough to find if we update the ws.apache.org page, but what do others think?

Thanks,
--Glen

On 10/18/2010 9:28 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Is this a job for the chair, or could I be helpful by opening the door
> to the Attic?
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
>> On 10/18/2010 7:05 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>> I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue to have a
>>>> WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most of these subprojects.
>>>>
>>>
>>> OK, but what's the scoop on deleting things that got atticed or
>>> transfered to Axis?
>>
>> The stuff that moved to Axis can/should all be removed.  We still need to ask
>> the Attic folks to suck in WSIF and Muse over there so those should stay
>> until that happens.
>>
>> --Glen
>>

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.

On 10/18/2010 7:05 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue to have a
>> WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most of these subprojects.
>>
> 
> OK, but what's the scoop on deleting things that got atticed or
> transfered to Axis?

The stuff that moved to Axis can/should all be removed.  We still need to ask
the Attic folks to suck in WSIF and Muse over there so those should stay
until that happens.

--Glen

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
> Hi Benson,
>
> On 10/17/2010 4:54 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> I hope no one will be offended by offering this as a vote right off
>> the bat, but it seems sort of self-evidently a good idea to me.
>>
>> I want to move the contents of 'commons' to be direct children of the
>> ws project in svn. I've already done this to the web site :-)
>
> This is in fact exactly what we discussed in the earlier "what's next for WS"
> threads.  However, the idea was to decide the fate of each of the commons
> subprojects *before* doing the move, to save ourselves the extra work of
> moving a project that would then become a TLP (i.e. Axiom?) or Attic'ed.
>
> I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue to have a
> WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most of these subprojects.
>

OK, but what's the scoop on deleting things that got atticed or
transfered to Axis?

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.

Hi Benson,

On 10/17/2010 4:54 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> I hope no one will be offended by offering this as a vote right off
> the bat, but it seems sort of self-evidently a good idea to me.
>
> I want to move the contents of 'commons' to be direct children of the
> ws project in svn. I've already done this to the web site :-)

This is in fact exactly what we discussed in the earlier "what's next for WS"
threads.  However, the idea was to decide the fate of each of the commons
subprojects *before* doing the move, to save ourselves the extra work of
moving a project that would then become a TLP (i.e. Axiom?) or Attic'ed.

I guess I'm +0 for doing this now, assuming that we will continue to have a
WS project in some way shape or form, containing many/most of these subprojects.

> I think we can leave a readme in 'commons' that explains where they went.
> 
> Is Guththila/ live?

IIRC Guththila was merged into the Axis2/C codebase, and is being developed
there.  So I believe that can go, and we can just delete it, though we should
confirm with the C team.

http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/axis/axis2/c/core/trunk/guththila/

--Glen

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.

OK, then, let me back up.

Conceptually, once upon a time this project had a lot more stuff in
it, and there was an idea that there were several small pieces that
could be conceptualized as 'commons'.

After the split of Axis and the Atticing of a few things, there is
much less content all around. The categorization of xmlschema and
neethi as 'commons' while, say, wss4j is not, is, I claim, completely
arbitrary and confusing. So, in terms of a web site that presents
these components to the world, I repeat that it seems to me to be
obvious that it should be flattened. If you disagree, you're welcome
to explain your point of view.

This wasn't even my idea. Dims originally did it when starting the
Confluence site, long before the reorg. I just carried it back onto
the Forrest site to simplify it and reduce the effort of cleaning it
up.

It's classic lazy consensus. No one else had done a lick of work in a
long time, work needed doing, so I picked a strategy and did
something. If you dislike it enough for a -1, in this case, I propose
that you should be willing shoulder some of the burden of meetings the
board's requirements for cleaning up the web site. This approach to
the web site is also rather consistent with the mailing list changes,
which attracted nothing but favorable comment.

As for making work, well, it seems to me that this community hasn't
been doing it's basic homework of maintaining the top of the web site
for *years*. Either some work is going to get made and done, or, I
think this project will by further subdivided to meet the board's
imperatives. I would be perfectly happy to take XmlSchema out as it's
own TLP and let the rest of this stuff end up wherever. I am also
willing, however, to take the WS project seriously as a project, and
not just a dustbin, which is what I am doing here by cleaning up the
web site.

Finally, I'm not seeing how it makes work in any interesting way to
clean up the arrangement of SVN. Since these pieces are all built
independently, their relative positions in the SVN tree are rather
uninteresting. Am I missing something?

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies
> <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I hope no one will be offended by offering this as a vote right off
>> the bat, but it seems sort of self-evidently a good idea to me.
>
> Don't know why you think so. Renaming stuff and so on is a lot of work
> which should be spent with a reason. Just calling it "self-evidently"
> isn't such a reason, IMO. And starting before asking is, at best,
> unlucky,
>
> Jochen
>
>
>
>
> --
> I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)
>

Re: [VOTE] Disassemble the 'commons' notion

Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies
<bi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I hope no one will be offended by offering this as a vote right off
> the bat, but it seems sort of self-evidently a good idea to me.

Don't know why you think so. Renaming stuff and so on is a lot of work
which should be spent with a reason. Just calling it "self-evidently"
isn't such a reason, IMO. And starting before asking is, at best,
unlucky,

Jochen

-- 
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)