You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM> on 2009/04/17 23:17:56 UTC
[DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Hi,
The Sanselan podling [1] has been incubating since 2007 and has
achieved most of the goals in incubation:
Code has been released [2] according to the incubator release guidelines
Status is up to date [3]
Community mailing lists are responded to promptly [5]
JIRA issue tracking is in use [4]
Web site with sample code and download is available
The last item before graduation is activity and diversity, which are
lacking. There were a few developers during the project but now we
have only one active developer. And it's not clear that we will be
able any time soon to attract more developers to fulfill the
requirements.
While discussing Sanselan in the incubator, it appears that there are
three end points for the podling:
1. Fail incubation and reject Sanselan
2. Continue (indefinitely?) to incubate Sanselan
3. Graduate Sanselan as a sub-project of another TLP
It appears to many of us that option 3 is the best way forward.
It also appears that Commons might be a good fit for the project.
I have some questions to kick off a discussion:
1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all
commons projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the
traffic?
2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun"
name. Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would
it be ok to have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of
Sanselan? For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would
these need to be renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun
name as above)?
If any additional oversight is needed to accept Sanselan, I'd be happy
to contribute as PMC member.
Thanks,
Craig
References:
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/sanselan.html
[2] http://incubator.apache.org/sanselan/site/index.html
[3] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sanselan/board/
[4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SANSELAN
[5] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-sanselan-dev/
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Phil Steitz wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> Phil Steitz wrote
>>
>>> We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
>>> the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
>>> work on it (which means more than just "oversight" - more like active
>>> involvement). This is not a hard and fast rule, but something we like
>>> to adhere to. We already have too many "dormant" components that should
>>> be moving out to the attic one day, so we aren't keen on promoting
>>> sandbox components or taking on codebases that we can't generate
>>> committer interest in. So lets see what level of interest we can
>>> generate here for Sanselan. We welcome all ASF committers at commons
>>> and we don't have a tremendously high bar for contributors who stick
>>> around long enough and play nice, so if we can get some volunteers to
>>> express interest, we can move forward.
>>>
>>>
>> I think at least all or nearly most of the current Sanselan
>> committers, e.g.
>> Charles, Philipp and myself will be committed to Sanselan.
>>
>>
> Great. That satisfies my only concern. I think the administrative
> items can be sorted out fairly easily, so I am +1 for welcoming this
> codebase and community into commons. I guess the next step is to
> decide whether to start in the sandbox or proper and then kick off a vote.
>
> From my perspective, proper is appropriate as the component has had a
> release. I will give others a chance to weigh in on this and then kick
> off the acceptance vote.
>
Cool! Thanks Phil!
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Phil Steitz wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> Phil Steitz wrote
>>
>>> We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
>>> the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
>>> work on it (which means more than just "oversight" - more like active
>>> involvement). This is not a hard and fast rule, but something we like
>>> to adhere to. We already have too many "dormant" components that should
>>> be moving out to the attic one day, so we aren't keen on promoting
>>> sandbox components or taking on codebases that we can't generate
>>> committer interest in. So lets see what level of interest we can
>>> generate here for Sanselan. We welcome all ASF committers at commons
>>> and we don't have a tremendously high bar for contributors who stick
>>> around long enough and play nice, so if we can get some volunteers to
>>> express interest, we can move forward.
>>>
>>>
>> I think at least all or nearly most of the current Sanselan
>> committers, e.g.
>> Charles, Philipp and myself will be committed to Sanselan.
>>
>>
> Great. That satisfies my only concern. I think the administrative
> items can be sorted out fairly easily, so I am +1 for welcoming this
> codebase and community into commons. I guess the next step is to
> decide whether to start in the sandbox or proper and then kick off a vote.
>
> From my perspective, proper is appropriate as the component has had a
> release. I will give others a chance to weigh in on this and then kick
> off the acceptance vote.
>
Cool! Thanks Phil!
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Phil Steitz wrote
>
>> We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
>> the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
>> work on it (which means more than just "oversight" - more like active
>> involvement). This is not a hard and fast rule, but something we like
>> to adhere to. We already have too many "dormant" components that should
>> be moving out to the attic one day, so we aren't keen on promoting
>> sandbox components or taking on codebases that we can't generate
>> committer interest in. So lets see what level of interest we can
>> generate here for Sanselan. We welcome all ASF committers at commons
>> and we don't have a tremendously high bar for contributors who stick
>> around long enough and play nice, so if we can get some volunteers to
>> express interest, we can move forward.
>>
>>
> I think at least all or nearly most of the current Sanselan committers, e.g.
> Charles, Philipp and myself will be committed to Sanselan.
>
>
Great. That satisfies my only concern. I think the administrative
items can be sorted out fairly easily, so I am +1 for welcoming this
codebase and community into commons. I guess the next step is to
decide whether to start in the sandbox or proper and then kick off a vote.
From my perspective, proper is appropriate as the component has had a
release. I will give others a chance to weigh in on this and then kick
off the acceptance vote.
Phil
> Carsten
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Phil Steitz wrote
> We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
> the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
> work on it (which means more than just "oversight" - more like active
> involvement). This is not a hard and fast rule, but something we like
> to adhere to. We already have too many "dormant" components that should
> be moving out to the attic one day, so we aren't keen on promoting
> sandbox components or taking on codebases that we can't generate
> committer interest in. So lets see what level of interest we can
> generate here for Sanselan. We welcome all ASF committers at commons
> and we don't have a tremendously high bar for contributors who stick
> around long enough and play nice, so if we can get some volunteers to
> express interest, we can move forward.
>
I think at least all or nearly most of the current Sanselan committers, e.g.
Charles, Philipp and myself will be committed to Sanselan.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
cziegeler@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Craig L Russell wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> On Apr 18, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>>> The last item before graduation is activity and diversity, which are
>>> lacking. There were a few developers during the project but now we
>>> have only one active developer. And it's not clear that we will be
>>> able any time soon to attract more developers to fulfill the
>>> requirements.
>>>
>>> While discussing Sanselan in the incubator, it appears that there
>>> are three end points for the podling:
>>>
>>> 1. Fail incubation and reject Sanselan
>>> 2. Continue (indefinitely?) to incubate Sanselan
>>> 3. Graduate Sanselan as a sub-project of another TLP
>>>
>>> It appears to many of us that option 3 is the best way forward.
>>>
>>> It also appears that Commons might be a good fit for the project.
>>>
>> Before getting into the administrative questions below, the first
>> question to ask is can we grow a community around this component in
>> commons.
>
> There is a small community. There are 31 subscribers to the dev list
> (5 or so are administrative/mentor subscriptions).
>
> There is a small but steady stream of email to the alias.
>
> There have been two committers, one of whom is currently active.
>
>> The lack of activity is a concern. Is anyone interested in coding on
>> this?
>
> The primary author is still committed to the project. There have been
> code contributions but it appears to me that the product mostly works
> as advertised. If it doesn't work, users write in, sometimes
> contributing a patch.
>
> So bottom line, there is a small community but not likely to grow into
> a full TLP-sized project.
We have a rule of thumb here that in order to graduate a component from
the sandbox to commons proper, we need to have 3 committers willing to
work on it (which means more than just "oversight" - more like active
involvement). This is not a hard and fast rule, but something we like
to adhere to. We already have too many "dormant" components that should
be moving out to the attic one day, so we aren't keen on promoting
sandbox components or taking on codebases that we can't generate
committer interest in. So lets see what level of interest we can
generate here for Sanselan. We welcome all ASF committers at commons
and we don't have a tremendously high bar for contributors who stick
around long enough and play nice, so if we can get some volunteers to
express interest, we can move forward.
Phil
>
> Craig
>>
>> Phil
>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Phil,
On Apr 18, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> The last item before graduation is activity and diversity, which
>> are lacking. There were a few developers during the project but now
>> we have only one active developer. And it's not clear that we will
>> be able any time soon to attract more developers to fulfill the
>> requirements.
>>
>> While discussing Sanselan in the incubator, it appears that there
>> are three end points for the podling:
>>
>> 1. Fail incubation and reject Sanselan
>> 2. Continue (indefinitely?) to incubate Sanselan
>> 3. Graduate Sanselan as a sub-project of another TLP
>>
>> It appears to many of us that option 3 is the best way forward.
>>
>> It also appears that Commons might be a good fit for the project.
>>
> Before getting into the administrative questions below, the first
> question to ask is can we grow a community around this component in
> commons.
There is a small community. There are 31 subscribers to the dev list
(5 or so are administrative/mentor subscriptions).
There is a small but steady stream of email to the alias.
There have been two committers, one of whom is currently active.
> The lack of activity is a concern. Is anyone interested in coding
> on this?
The primary author is still committed to the project. There have been
code contributions but it appears to me that the product mostly works
as advertised. If it doesn't work, users write in, sometimes
contributing a patch.
So bottom line, there is a small community but not likely to grow into
a full TLP-sized project.
Craig
>
> Phil
>
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Phil,
On Apr 18, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> The last item before graduation is activity and diversity, which
>> are lacking. There were a few developers during the project but now
>> we have only one active developer. And it's not clear that we will
>> be able any time soon to attract more developers to fulfill the
>> requirements.
>>
>> While discussing Sanselan in the incubator, it appears that there
>> are three end points for the podling:
>>
>> 1. Fail incubation and reject Sanselan
>> 2. Continue (indefinitely?) to incubate Sanselan
>> 3. Graduate Sanselan as a sub-project of another TLP
>>
>> It appears to many of us that option 3 is the best way forward.
>>
>> It also appears that Commons might be a good fit for the project.
>>
> Before getting into the administrative questions below, the first
> question to ask is can we grow a community around this component in
> commons.
There is a small community. There are 31 subscribers to the dev list
(5 or so are administrative/mentor subscriptions).
There is a small but steady stream of email to the alias.
There have been two committers, one of whom is currently active.
> The lack of activity is a concern. Is anyone interested in coding
> on this?
The primary author is still committed to the project. There have been
code contributions but it appears to me that the product mostly works
as advertised. If it doesn't work, users write in, sometimes
contributing a patch.
So bottom line, there is a small community but not likely to grow into
a full TLP-sized project.
Craig
>
> Phil
>
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Craig L Russell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Sanselan podling [1] has been incubating since 2007 and has
> achieved most of the goals in incubation:
>
> Code has been released [2] according to the incubator release guidelines
> Status is up to date [3]
> Community mailing lists are responded to promptly [5]
> JIRA issue tracking is in use [4]
> Web site with sample code and download is available
>
> The last item before graduation is activity and diversity, which are
> lacking. There were a few developers during the project but now we
> have only one active developer. And it's not clear that we will be
> able any time soon to attract more developers to fulfill the
> requirements.
>
> While discussing Sanselan in the incubator, it appears that there are
> three end points for the podling:
>
> 1. Fail incubation and reject Sanselan
> 2. Continue (indefinitely?) to incubate Sanselan
> 3. Graduate Sanselan as a sub-project of another TLP
>
> It appears to many of us that option 3 is the best way forward.
>
> It also appears that Commons might be a good fit for the project.
Before getting into the administrative questions below, the first
question to ask is can we grow a community around this component in
commons. The lack of activity is a concern. Is anyone interested in
coding on this?
Phil
>
> I have some questions to kick off a discussion:
>
> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all
> commons projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the
> traffic?
>
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun"
> name. Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would
> it be ok to have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
>
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of
> Sanselan? For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would
> these need to be renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun
> name as above)?
>
> If any additional oversight is needed to accept Sanselan, I'd be happy
> to contribute as PMC member.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>
> References:
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/sanselan.html
> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/sanselan/site/index.html
> [3] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sanselan/board/
> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SANSELAN
> [5] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-sanselan-dev/
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> On 18.04.2009 22:03:53 Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>> Hi, Craig,
>>
>> I'm personally not sure that commons would be the best fit for
>> Sanselan. Despite the name, I'd consider the commons of xmlgraphics
>> (despite the name, this is not only about XML) a better place.
>
> I thought along similar lines but the problem is as follows: XML
> Graphics currently doesn't use Sanselan. It currently does not offer
> anything that we don't already have or need. If it had a 100% Java JPEG
> decoder or a JBIG2 codec, that would be different. Also, XML Graphics
> barely has enough energy to keep itself afloat. I don't think there's
> going to be large enthusiasm to integrate Sanselan as further subproject.
> That said, I'm personally not opposed to include Sanselan in XML
> Graphics but don't expect much help from any of the project members. I'm
> just being realistic.
>
>> Nevertheless, I'd vote in favour of Sanselan, if it comes to that.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
>>
>> > 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
>> > projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?
>>
>> That's a problem that every part of Commons has. And another reason,
>> why you could possibly prefer the above place: No doubt, commons-dev
>> is relatively high volume. I am not sure, whether the shared mailing
>> list is the best solution, but I wouldn't like to have that discussion
>> in this context. As already said, it applies to every part and isn't
>> specific to Sanselan.
>
> Right. That's my problem with Commons as a whole. By some it is
> presented as an advantage, but I see it as the opposite. But this is how
> Commons currently works and I don't see that changing, so if Sanselan
> went down that road, it would have to live with it. I guess it's mainly
> Charles (the original author and single active committer) who has to be
> comfortable with this.
Commons manages to function with small groups of developers for each
component by the wider community providing oversight. Without this
many (most?) components would face a perpetual challenge in getting
the necessary 3 +1 votes to do anything (see http://tinyurl.com/c3yx5u
). Part of what makes this shared responsibility work IMO is that
there are no barriers between components and there is a single
community which operates on shared mailing lists. If we had 30+
mailing lists (for each component) then it may make following topics
for a particular component easier, but I'm sure we would loose on
community oversight.
Also by convention we prefix the subject of email messages with the
name of the component and its pretty straight forward to filter by
component if someone wants to.
>> > 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
>> > Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
>> > have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
>>
>> IMO, no. I am unaware of an existing example without the commons
>> prefix, but what gives.
>
> I guess it would automatically be Commons Sanselan, but it would
> probably still just be referred to as just Sanselan. I don't think
> that's so important.
>
>> > 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
>> > For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
>> > renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
>>
>> Definitely no. I am not even sure, whether there is *any* existing
>> part of commons with the org.apache.commons prefix. OTOH, I am quite
>> sure that there are lots of examples without.
>
> I agree, that shouldn't be necessary. Another package change doesn't
> feel right.
Its preferable IMO, but not a requirement.
Niall
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
On 18.04.2009 22:03:53 Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> Hi, Craig,
>
> I'm personally not sure that commons would be the best fit for
> Sanselan. Despite the name, I'd consider the commons of xmlgraphics
> (despite the name, this is not only about XML) a better place.
I thought along similar lines but the problem is as follows: XML
Graphics currently doesn't use Sanselan. It currently does not offer
anything that we don't already have or need. If it had a 100% Java JPEG
decoder or a JBIG2 codec, that would be different. Also, XML Graphics
barely has enough energy to keep itself afloat. I don't think there's
going to be large enthusiasm to integrate Sanselan as further subproject.
That said, I'm personally not opposed to include Sanselan in XML
Graphics but don't expect much help from any of the project members. I'm
just being realistic.
> Nevertheless, I'd vote in favour of Sanselan, if it comes to that.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
>
> > 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
> > projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?
>
> That's a problem that every part of Commons has. And another reason,
> why you could possibly prefer the above place: No doubt, commons-dev
> is relatively high volume. I am not sure, whether the shared mailing
> list is the best solution, but I wouldn't like to have that discussion
> in this context. As already said, it applies to every part and isn't
> specific to Sanselan.
Right. That's my problem with Commons as a whole. By some it is
presented as an advantage, but I see it as the opposite. But this is how
Commons currently works and I don't see that changing, so if Sanselan
went down that road, it would have to live with it. I guess it's mainly
Charles (the original author and single active committer) who has to be
comfortable with this.
> > 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
> > Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
> > have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
>
> IMO, no. I am unaware of an existing example without the commons
> prefix, but what gives.
I guess it would automatically be Commons Sanselan, but it would
probably still just be referred to as just Sanselan. I don't think
that's so important.
> > 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
> > For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
> > renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
>
> Definitely no. I am not even sure, whether there is *any* existing
> part of commons with the org.apache.commons prefix. OTOH, I am quite
> sure that there are lots of examples without.
I agree, that shouldn't be necessary. Another package change doesn't
feel right.
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Craig,
I'm personally not sure that commons would be the best fit for
Sanselan. Despite the name, I'd consider the commons of xmlgraphics
(despite the name, this is not only about XML) a better place.
Nevertheless, I'd vote in favour of Sanselan, if it comes to that.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
> projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?
That's a problem that every part of Commons has. And another reason,
why you could possibly prefer the above place: No doubt, commons-dev
is relatively high volume. I am not sure, whether the shared mailing
list is the best solution, but I wouldn't like to have that discussion
in this context. As already said, it applies to every part and isn't
specific to Sanselan.
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
> Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
> have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
IMO, no. I am unaware of an existing example without the commons
prefix, but what gives.
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
> For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
> renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
Definitely no. I am not even sure, whether there is *any* existing
part of commons with the org.apache.commons prefix. OTOH, I am quite
sure that there are lots of examples without.
Jochen
--
I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my
telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out
how to use my telephone.
-- (Bjarne Stroustrup,
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#really-say-that
My guess: Nokia E50)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Craig,
I'm personally not sure that commons would be the best fit for
Sanselan. Despite the name, I'd consider the commons of xmlgraphics
(despite the name, this is not only about XML) a better place.
Nevertheless, I'd vote in favour of Sanselan, if it comes to that.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
> projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?
That's a problem that every part of Commons has. And another reason,
why you could possibly prefer the above place: No doubt, commons-dev
is relatively high volume. I am not sure, whether the shared mailing
list is the best solution, but I wouldn't like to have that discussion
in this context. As already said, it applies to every part and isn't
specific to Sanselan.
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
> Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
> have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
IMO, no. I am unaware of an existing example without the commons
prefix, but what gives.
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
> For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
> renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
Definitely no. I am not even sure, whether there is *any* existing
part of commons with the org.apache.commons prefix. OTOH, I am quite
sure that there are lots of examples without.
Jochen
--
I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my
telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out
how to use my telephone.
-- (Bjarne Stroustrup,
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#really-say-that
My guess: Nokia E50)
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Craig L Russell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Sanselan podling [1] has been incubating since 2007 and has
> achieved most of the goals in incubation:
>
> Code has been released [2] according to the incubator release guidelines
> Status is up to date [3]
> Community mailing lists are responded to promptly [5]
> JIRA issue tracking is in use [4]
> Web site with sample code and download is available
>
> The last item before graduation is activity and diversity, which are
> lacking. There were a few developers during the project but now we
> have only one active developer. And it's not clear that we will be
> able any time soon to attract more developers to fulfill the
> requirements.
>
> While discussing Sanselan in the incubator, it appears that there are
> three end points for the podling:
>
> 1. Fail incubation and reject Sanselan
> 2. Continue (indefinitely?) to incubate Sanselan
> 3. Graduate Sanselan as a sub-project of another TLP
>
> It appears to many of us that option 3 is the best way forward.
>
> It also appears that Commons might be a good fit for the project.
Before getting into the administrative questions below, the first
question to ask is can we grow a community around this component in
commons. The lack of activity is a concern. Is anyone interested in
coding on this?
Phil
>
> I have some questions to kick off a discussion:
>
> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all
> commons projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the
> traffic?
>
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun"
> name. Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would
> it be ok to have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
>
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of
> Sanselan? For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would
> these need to be renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun
> name as above)?
>
> If any additional oversight is needed to accept Sanselan, I'd be happy
> to contribute as PMC member.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>
> References:
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/sanselan.html
> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/sanselan/site/index.html
> [3] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sanselan/board/
> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SANSELAN
> [5] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-sanselan-dev/
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Craig,
I'm personally not sure that commons would be the best fit for
Sanselan. Despite the name, I'd consider the commons of xmlgraphics
(despite the name, this is not only about XML) a better place.
Nevertheless, I'd vote in favour of Sanselan, if it comes to that.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
> projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?
That's a problem that every part of Commons has. And another reason,
why you could possibly prefer the above place: No doubt, commons-dev
is relatively high volume. I am not sure, whether the shared mailing
list is the best solution, but I wouldn't like to have that discussion
in this context. As already said, it applies to every part and isn't
specific to Sanselan.
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
> Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
> have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
IMO, no. I am unaware of an existing example without the commons
prefix, but what gives.
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
> For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
> renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
Definitely no. I am not even sure, whether there is *any* existing
part of commons with the org.apache.commons prefix. OTOH, I am quite
sure that there are lots of examples without.
Jochen
--
I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my
telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out
how to use my telephone.
-- (Bjarne Stroustrup,
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#really-say-that
My guess: Nokia E50)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
i am not on the Commons PMC, i can only speak for myself.
> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
> projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?
I don't think so - there are several other small components on
commons. It looks like sometimes a components gets suddenly very
active and sends more mails (like compress at the moment). Then -
maybe after the release - it wents more silents and gives room for the
other components.
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
> Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
> have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
There are Components like Betwixt or Jelly - i think Sanselan would
fit perfectly. However, I read a discussion were new components are
prefered to get functional names.
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
> For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
> renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
I don't know any other components which have not commons the package names.
However, this is from my youngster expierence. Senior comitters may
have other opinions. But I just wanted to say that I really like
Sanselan and it helped me lots of times. I strongly believe that it
would be a loss if you would let Sanselan go.
Cheers,
Christian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org