You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Felipe Leme <ja...@felipeal.net> on 2005/08/08 06:54:25 UTC
Web Components/Common project
Hello all,
What's the status on the new project proposal? Has the discussion moved
to another list or has it just staled?
Anyway, the Jakarta Taglib Project has voted how it would like to take
part on this new project, and the result was:
1.The Jakarta Taglibs Project would like to be merged into the project
2.The Jakarta Standard Taglib should then be a project of its own
3.The remaining taglibs would be gradually migrated to the new project,
the most actives first
4.It's not decided yet if the migrated taglibs would have a newer
release prior to the migration
-- Felipe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 16:27 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
<snip>
> NOTE-2
> ======
> Despite the suitability of this name, we are hesitant to duplicate the
> Commons brand and confuse the user.
even though Apache WC would definitely tickled many brits...
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> If there is a connection to be drawn, I think many probably won't ;-)
Always the risk with names that don't spell out precisely what name.
You can easily be *too* clever, this could be one of those cases.
> I'd refrain from voting until a formal thread appears on the subject.
> I know its hard ;-) but voting now will make it tougher to tally
> opinions from multiple threads. Hen has taken the lead to call a vote
> [ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-general&m=112361926416536&w=2
> ], shouldn't be too long a wait.
Yeah, I got a bit excited because I really do like the name :) I'll
throw my vote in the official thread when it starts... knowing me I'll
probably change my mind 10 times by then anyway :)
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>.
On 8/9/05, Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> wrote:
<snip/>
> All would be describable (assuming no clashes) as:
>
> Apache Jakarta Web Components
> Apache Web Components
>
> There's the option of doing W*4J or something, but we can discuss that
> later I think as it's just an altered presentation of the chosen name.
<snap/>
Agreed, plus I'm not too keen to see a Java tie-in with the name,
given the current scope of the sub-project. We have other programming
models even in the starter set.
On 8/9/05, Frank W. Zammetti <fz...@omnytex.com> wrote:
> For what it's worth, I actually like Silk a great deal... in fact, I'd
> go ahead and give it my non-binding +1... <snip/>
If there is a connection to be drawn, I think many probably won't ;-)
I'd refrain from voting until a formal thread appears on the subject.
I know its hard ;-) but voting now will make it tougher to tally
opinions from multiple threads. Hen has taken the lead to call a vote
[ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-general&m=112361926416536&w=2
], shouldn't be too long a wait.
-Rahul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Felipe Leme <ja...@felipeal.net>.
Martin Cooper wrote:
> Some other names were added to the wiki page:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/CreatingCommonsForWebComponents
I forgot to add some names to that page:
Webbies (has the same idea of weblets, but causing less confusion)
Jakartlets (someone suggested we use a name without "Web" - it would be
cool to be derived from Jakarta then, as Jakarta is tied to server side
Java)
>
> That would probably add:
>
> - web libs
> - web tools
>
> to your list above. (I'm not sure how appropriate 'web libs' would be
> though, since I'm not sure I'd refer to, say, a compression filter as
> a 'library'.)
Web Tools can be a problem too, as it conflicts with the Eclipse Web
Tools Platform.
-- Felipe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On 8/9/05, Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> wrote:
>
> Prior to calling a vote tomorrow, am I missing any potential names. This
> is all I dredged out of the previous mail thread. 'webapp' was mentioned
> instead of 'web'; but didn't seem to get any traction.
>
> ------------------------
> web bricks
> web components
> web parts (NOTE-1)
> web commons (NOTE-2)
> ------------------------
Some other names were added to the wiki page:
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/CreatingCommonsForWebComponents
That would probably add:
- web libs
- web tools
to your list above. (I'm not sure how appropriate 'web libs' would be
though, since I'm not sure I'd refer to, say, a compression filter as
a 'library'.)
--
Martin Cooper
> All would be describable (assuming no clashes) as:
>
> Apache Jakarta Web Components
> Apache Web Components
>
> There's the option of doing W*4J or something, but we can discuss that
> later I think as it's just an altered presentation of the chosen name.
>
> NOTE-1
> ======
> Web parts would clash with javawebparts.sf.net name-wise and while the
> owner of this loose trademark is interested in being involved, we wouldn't
> really know until the code was looked at etc.
>
> Also Web parts appears to be a Microsoft term (google for it); which will
> definitely cause problems if our definition of Web Parts is different to
> theirs.
>
> NOTE-2
> ======
> Despite the suitability of this name, we are hesitant to duplicate the
> Commons brand and confuse the user.
>
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
For what it's worth, I actually like Silk a great deal... in fact, I'd
go ahead and give it my non-binding +1... I was the one that put the
idea on the Wiki of a more codeword-ish name, and I think Silk is perfect.
Frank
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>How about Apache Spider Web?
>
>
> No, but you just gave me an idea:
>
> Apache Silk
>
> Silk is what webs are made of.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> How about Apache Spider Web?
No, but you just gave me an idea:
Apache Silk
Silk is what webs are made of.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hey,
How about Apache Spider Web? ;) Sorts of like it traps things, double-entendre
on the meaning of web, etc.. Just thought I'd throw it out there ;)
Yoav
--- "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> > Also Web parts appears to be a Microsoft term
>
> I have a shirt around here someone regarding "Parts for Java", which was a
> product from ParcPlace.
>
> Apache WebParts would be OK with me, but I care more about the content of
> the project than the name.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> Also Web parts appears to be a Microsoft term
I have a shirt around here someone regarding "Parts for Java", which was a
product from ParcPlace.
Apache WebParts would be OK with me, but I care more about the content of
the project than the name.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
WebXxxx Naming Was: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Prior to calling a vote tomorrow, am I missing any potential names. This
is all I dredged out of the previous mail thread. 'webapp' was mentioned
instead of 'web'; but didn't seem to get any traction.
------------------------
web bricks
web components
web parts (NOTE-1)
web commons (NOTE-2)
------------------------
All would be describable (assuming no clashes) as:
Apache Jakarta Web Components
Apache Web Components
There's the option of doing W*4J or something, but we can discuss that
later I think as it's just an altered presentation of the chosen name.
NOTE-1
======
Web parts would clash with javawebparts.sf.net name-wise and while the
owner of this loose trademark is interested in being involved, we wouldn't
really know until the code was looked at etc.
Also Web parts appears to be a Microsoft term (google for it); which will
definitely cause problems if our definition of Web Parts is different to
theirs.
NOTE-2
======
Despite the suitability of this name, we are hesitant to duplicate the
Commons brand and confuse the user.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
javawebparts.sf.net is my projects' page, nothing to do with this Apache
project... not sure why the code doesn't show up in the CVS stats, but if
you browse the repository you'll see it, and of course there are I think 8
file releases to date, some activity in the forums, mailing list activity,
and in the neighborhood of 10 contributors to date (one, aside from me,
ongoing, who will likely be made a committer shortly).
There are currently no plans for *any* content to come in to this new
Apache project from JWP, whether it has to go through the Incubator (I
assume it would have to) or not... that's what the last few messages in
this thread have been about :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
On Tue, August 9, 2005 4:26 pm, Curt Arnold said:
>
> On Aug 9, 2005, at 2:02 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>> I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years
>> back. I had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I
>> wanted to donate into various Commons projects. Some was accepted,
>> some was not. I'm pretty certain that not all of
>> javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>. Some of it will
>> be code that you like Frank.
>
> Has there been any discussion with the Incubator PMC whether this
> contribution needs to come through them? Or does this somehow not
> fit into their purview?
>
> I took a quick look at the javawebparts.sf.net site which currently
> looks essentially like Frank Zammetti's personal site, nothing in the
> CVS, only one committer, etc, so the legal issues are likely simpler
> than other SF projects that have migrated into Apache. I don't know
> how much of the initial load of the Web Components/Common project is
> expected to come from javawebparts.sf.net.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
To correct myself, the correct way for the code to come in is via the PMC
and the following form:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/projects/ip-clearance-template.html
Happened to be doing this for the Commons CSV submission. With the case
below it looks like I'm pretty close to what would happen.
Hen
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Curt Arnold wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2005, at 2:02 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>
>>> I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years back.
>>> I had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I wanted to donate
>>> into various Commons projects. Some was accepted, some was not. I'm pretty
>>> certain that not all of javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>.
>>> Some of it will be code that you like Frank.
>>
>> Has there been any discussion with the Incubator PMC whether this
>> contribution needs to come through them? Or does this somehow not fit into
>> their purview?
>>
>> I took a quick look at the javawebparts.sf.net site which currently looks
>> essentially like Frank Zammetti's personal site, nothing in the CVS, only
>> one committer, etc, so the legal issues are likely simpler than other SF
>> projects that have migrated into Apache. I don't know how much of the
>> initial load of the Web Components/Common project is expected to come from
>> javawebparts.sf.net.
>
> The initial load would be rearrangement of existing Jakarta codebase; some
> Commons components and Taglibs.
>
> I can't see Frank's codebase being wanted without Frank himself being wanted,
> so a committers CLA would take care of it when we get to that step (unless
> other committers are added to javawebparts etc).
>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Curt Arnold wrote:
>
> On Aug 9, 2005, at 2:02 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>> I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years back. I
>> had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I wanted to donate into
>> various Commons projects. Some was accepted, some was not. I'm pretty
>> certain that not all of javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>.
>> Some of it will be code that you like Frank.
>
> Has there been any discussion with the Incubator PMC whether this
> contribution needs to come through them? Or does this somehow not fit into
> their purview?
>
> I took a quick look at the javawebparts.sf.net site which currently looks
> essentially like Frank Zammetti's personal site, nothing in the CVS, only one
> committer, etc, so the legal issues are likely simpler than other SF projects
> that have migrated into Apache. I don't know how much of the initial load of
> the Web Components/Common project is expected to come from
> javawebparts.sf.net.
The initial load would be rearrangement of existing Jakarta codebase; some
Commons components and Taglibs.
I can't see Frank's codebase being wanted without Frank himself being
wanted, so a committers CLA would take care of it when we get to that step
(unless other committers are added to javawebparts etc).
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> Has there been any discussion with the Incubator PMC whether this
> contribution needs to come through them? Or does this somehow not
> fit into their purview?
All external codebases brought into the ASF need to come through the
Incubator. Sometimes, as Henri noted, that only requires the IP clearance
to be filed. We put some guidelines into that document for when it might be
appropriate.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>.
On Aug 9, 2005, at 2:02 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years
> back. I had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I
> wanted to donate into various Commons projects. Some was accepted,
> some was not. I'm pretty certain that not all of
> javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>. Some of it will
> be code that you like Frank.
Has there been any discussion with the Incubator PMC whether this
contribution needs to come through them? Or does this somehow not
fit into their purview?
I took a quick look at the javawebparts.sf.net site which currently
looks essentially like Frank Zammetti's personal site, nothing in the
CVS, only one committer, etc, so the legal issues are likely simpler
than other SF projects that have migrated into Apache. I don't know
how much of the initial load of the Web Components/Common project is
expected to come from javawebparts.sf.net.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
> Yep, that's a decision we all make in contributing to the ASF communities.
> Are you happy to go with the commuhnity view, or want to keep things
> closer to your chest.
I think too that it's maybe a little easier to go with the community view
when its a project you didn't yourself give birth to :)
> Or rather, you are getting involved with others. I suspect that the
> process would begin by restructuring the Jakarta bits, and then pulling in
> the external code.
I think your point is a good one... there is enough already within the
foundation to get this project off the ground, and nothing says I can't
come back a few months down the road and offer up my stuff at that point.
Might even be easier at that point to see if the fit is truly right.
> I've not looked at your code, but the numbers my arse suggests based on
> how much of my code got in would be 20% straight in, 20% with
> modifications and 60% not in. Of that 60% not in, I killed half because
> someone else had put bits in, especially in Collections, but that's less
> likely to happen here I suspect.
Yeah, those are the kinds of percentages I can't imagine being happy
with... the two 20's are fine, but that 60 stands out in a negative way
for me. Of course I know you nor anyone else can say right now what it
would really wind up being, but your experience is a good general guide
for me.
> Probably not; it'd be a trademark issue at that point. One of those "If we
> don't defend the trademark against WP4J Jr, we can't depend it against
> Evil Company's WP4J product".
I kind of thought so as I was typing that :)
> Let's do that. The suggested name of Web Parts does cause us to jump the
> gun a lot in terms of assumptions, so I'll go ahead and call a vote with
> Web Parts included but with a big note that it affects how we go ahead
> with the subproject.
I think that's the best plan. If everyone winds up really strongly being
in favor of Web Parts then there can be some discussion on how to make
that work. But no sense going down that road if the consensus is for
something else anyway.
> My gut feel is that there's a high chance you won't be happy with the way
> things would play out; ie) everyone could agree that AJAX components were
> outside scope or something.
Yes, I suspect your right. There are certain decisions I could live with
without much trouble at all, but there are some that I'm not sure I could
go along with. If I get involved later and I don't like the decisions, I
can just bail and no one is hurt, but if I agree to certain things now and
then find I don't like how its going I'm locked-in to an extent and it
becomes painful, so better to avoid that up-front.
> Hen
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
>> +1.
>>
>> Let's leave Jakarta out of the names. It's assumed. So in the acronym
>> example from Frank, it would be Apache Jakarta WP4J and not JWP4J.
>
> Makes sense.
>
>> Firstly, don't worry about the committership part Frank. I'm certain that
>> if you had a decently sized lump of code accepted, and wanted to continue
>> to maintain and enhance it and the code around, that we'll quickly
>> nominate committership and get it passed etc. There's doubt in that people
>> are involved etc, but I've never seen the community refuse to let someone
>> in who is actively doing work and wanting in.
>
> That is definitely one of my concerns... I absolutely want to continue to
> evolve what I started and build upon it,
Yep, that's a decision we all make in contributing to the ASF communities.
Are you happy to go with the commuhnity view, or want to keep things
closer to your chest.
> and now I have others getting involved too so I have even more of a
> concern than when it was just me because they are affected too.
Or rather, you are getting involved with others. I suspect that the
process would begin by restructuring the Jakarta bits, and then pulling in
the external code.
>> I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years back.
>> I had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I wanted to donate
>> into various Commons projects. Some was accepted, some was not. I'm pretty
>> certain that not all of javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>.
>> Some of it will be code that you like Frank.
>
> I can live with that, but of course it matters how much is deemed "crap"
> :) If 80% of it wound up being accepted, and assuming that 80% included
> some of the more interesting stuff (AjaxTags for instance), then I'd be OK
> with that. I don't know what percentage winds up making me happy or
> unhappy either, I just pulled 80% out of my a** :)
I've not looked at your code, but the numbers my arse suggests based on
how much of my code got in would be 20% straight in, 20% with
modifications and 60% not in. Of that 60% not in, I killed half because
someone else had put bits in, especially in Collections, but that's less
likely to happen here I suspect.
I also killed some code because I agreed with the points of view for
rejecting it.
>> 1) Drop the code that doesn't make it in.
>> 2) Have a different project name for the code that doesn't make it in.
>> 3) Vote for something else :)
>>
>> 1+2 both involve deprecating the javawebparts stuff.
>
> Well, 1 involves that... 2 just involves a name change, which I'd be OK
> with if I was involved with the Apache project on an ongoing basis. Heck,
> I could even call it "WP4J Jr." :)
Probably not; it'd be a trademark issue at that point. One of those "If we
don't defend the trademark against WP4J Jr, we can't depend it against
Evil Company's WP4J product".
>> Hopefully none of that sounds too aggressive or anything; just trying to
>> make this nice and simple so Frank can make his decision and we can
>> include or not include Web Parts and WP4J as potential names.
>
> No, not aggressive at all, I very much appreciate the discussion and
> consideration! :)
>
> I think you understand the conundrum for me... Java Web Parts is beginning
> to build a community, albeit slowly, and I have full control over it (for
> the time being anyway)... There are definite benefits to it being subsumed
(snip)
> I understand wanting to clear it up before calling a vote, but it might
> be better to do the vote sooner than later... at the end of the day, Web
> Parts might not win the vote anyway... if it doesn't, than all of this
> discussion is moot... I can still contribute my stuff later if I want,
> but the project can move forward either way.
Let's do that. The suggested name of Web Parts does cause us to jump the
gun a lot in terms of assumptions, so I'll go ahead and call a vote with
Web Parts included but with a big note that it affects how we go ahead
with the subproject.
My gut feel is that there's a high chance you won't be happy with the way
things would play out; ie) everyone could agree that AJAX components were
outside scope or something.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
> +1.
>
> Let's leave Jakarta out of the names. It's assumed. So in the acronym
> example from Frank, it would be Apache Jakarta WP4J and not JWP4J.
Makes sense.
> Firstly, don't worry about the committership part Frank. I'm certain that
> if you had a decently sized lump of code accepted, and wanted to continue
> to maintain and enhance it and the code around, that we'll quickly
> nominate committership and get it passed etc. There's doubt in that people
> are involved etc, but I've never seen the community refuse to let someone
> in who is actively doing work and wanting in.
That is definitely one of my concerns... I absolutely want to continue to
evolve what I started and build upon it, and now I have others getting
involved too so I have even more of a concern than when it was just me
because they are affected too.
> I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years back.
> I had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I wanted to donate
> into various Commons projects. Some was accepted, some was not. I'm pretty
> certain that not all of javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>.
> Some of it will be code that you like Frank.
I can live with that, but of course it matters how much is deemed "crap"
:) If 80% of it wound up being accepted, and assuming that 80% included
some of the more interesting stuff (AjaxTags for instance), then I'd be OK
with that. I don't know what percentage winds up making me happy or
unhappy either, I just pulled 80% out of my a** :)
> This means that you'll hit a point where Jakarta <name> will have some of
> your best code, and the rest will be sitting in javawebparts and you'll
> have to decide what to do with it. Do you keep copies of the Jakarta
> <name> stuff (problematic)? Do you keep javawebparts as an addition to the
> Jakarta <name> stuff (see http://www.osjava.org/genjava/)?
An addition seems reasonable... and who knows, even the stuff that doesn't
get accepted initially could wind up building a community on its own and
get added later, so that doesn't bother me.
> In either case, the name javawebparts will be confusing when compared to
> Jakarta <name> if <name> = Web Parts. So you've three options I reckon:
Agreed.
> 1) Drop the code that doesn't make it in.
> 2) Have a different project name for the code that doesn't make it in.
> 3) Vote for something else :)
>
> 1+2 both involve deprecating the javawebparts stuff.
Well, 1 involves that... 2 just involves a name change, which I'd be OK
with if I was involved with the Apache project on an ongoing basis. Heck,
I could even call it "WP4J Jr." :)
> Hopefully none of that sounds too aggressive or anything; just trying to
> make this nice and simple so Frank can make his decision and we can
> include or not include Web Parts and WP4J as potential names.
No, not aggressive at all, I very much appreciate the discussion and
consideration! :)
I'm in a bit of a tough position (which you have gone through, so I know
you understand) because I really do want to be involved with this project,
but there are things that would make the decision very easy if they could
be known up-front, but of course they can't be... What code will actually
be accepted and will I be invited to join as a committer chief among them.
I think you understand the conundrum for me... Java Web Parts is beginning
to build a community, albeit slowly, and I have full control over it (for
the time being anyway)... There are definite benefits to it being subsumed
by an Apache project and being involved with that instead, but I also give
up a fair amount potentially and if I didn't wind up becoming a committer
and having a good chunk of my work accepted, those benefits might not be
worth the trade-off.
I hope I'm not coming across like I'm trying to worm my way into anything
either... I just don't want to lose more than I gain :)
> Let's give Frank a couple of days, then call the vote depending on his
> answer. (Lack of answer means they can't be in the options).
I understand wanting to clear it up before calling a vote, but it might be
better to do the vote sooner than later... at the end of the day, Web
Parts might not win the vote anyway... if it doesn't, than all of this
discussion is moot... I can still contribute my stuff later if I want, but
the project can move forward either way.
> Hen
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Martin Cooper wrote:
> On 8/9/05, Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 8/8/05, Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/8/05, robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> <snip/>
>>>> IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about
>>>> the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a
>>>> consensus. opinions?
>>> <snap/>
>>
>> Is there any interest in resolving the name issue as mentioned below?
>> I think everyone's perception of the methodology used is key to a
>> swift resolution, so it'd be nice to flesh out what the method should
>> be.
>
> Yes. We need to pick a name ASAP so that we can get the new subproject
> off the ground with its own mailing lists, SVN repo, etc.
>
> The problem is that the list of candidate names, as it is now, is
> rather long, which could make for a somewhat messy vote. Therefore,
> I'd like to propose removing some of those candidate names prior to a
> vote:
>
> * Remove anything that has "potential conflict". Let's just not go there.
> * Remove League, Confederation and Bloc. I honestly don't think those
> are serious names.
> * I would also recommend removing Weblets, since this suggests a
> uniformity of structure that simply won't be there.
>
> That would still leave us with quite a few options to choose among.
+1.
Let's leave Jakarta out of the names. It's assumed. So in the acronym
example from Frank, it would be Apache Jakarta WP4J and not JWP4J.
The only real problem is with Frank's suggestion of Web Parts and
confusion over whether we'd be able to use the name; so let's get that
cleared up before having a vote.
Firstly, don't worry about the committership part Frank. I'm certain that
if you had a decently sized lump of code accepted, and wanted to continue
to maintain and enhance it and the code around, that we'll quickly
nominate committership and get it passed etc. There's doubt in that people
are involved etc, but I've never seen the community refuse to let someone
in who is actively doing work and wanting in.
I went through the same situation Frank is heading into a few years back.
I had a large lump of code, some good, some crap that I wanted to donate
into various Commons projects. Some was accepted, some was not. I'm pretty
certain that not all of javawebparts.sf.net will end up in Jakarta <name>.
Some of it will be code that you like Frank.
This means that you'll hit a point where Jakarta <name> will have some of
your best code, and the rest will be sitting in javawebparts and you'll
have to decide what to do with it. Do you keep copies of the Jakarta
<name> stuff (problematic)? Do you keep javawebparts as an addition to the
Jakarta <name> stuff (see http://www.osjava.org/genjava/)?
In either case, the name javawebparts will be confusing when compared to
Jakarta <name> if <name> = Web Parts. So you've three options I reckon:
1) Drop the code that doesn't make it in.
2) Have a different project name for the code that doesn't make it in.
3) Vote for something else :)
1+2 both involve deprecating the javawebparts stuff.
Hopefully none of that sounds too aggressive or anything; just trying to
make this nice and simple so Frank can make his decision and we can
include or not include Web Parts and WP4J as potential names.
Let's give Frank a couple of days, then call the vote depending on his
answer. (Lack of answer means they can't be in the options).
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On 8/9/05, Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/8/05, Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/8/05, robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > <snip/>
> > > IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about
> > > the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a
> > > consensus. opinions?
> > <snap/>
>
> Is there any interest in resolving the name issue as mentioned below?
> I think everyone's perception of the methodology used is key to a
> swift resolution, so it'd be nice to flesh out what the method should
> be.
Yes. We need to pick a name ASAP so that we can get the new subproject
off the ground with its own mailing lists, SVN repo, etc.
The problem is that the list of candidate names, as it is now, is
rather long, which could make for a somewhat messy vote. Therefore,
I'd like to propose removing some of those candidate names prior to a
vote:
* Remove anything that has "potential conflict". Let's just not go there.
* Remove League, Confederation and Bloc. I honestly don't think those
are serious names.
* I would also recommend removing Weblets, since this suggests a
uniformity of structure that simply won't be there.
That would still leave us with quite a few options to choose among.
--
Martin Cooper
> -Rahul
>
> > While it
> > would be nice, I doubt this is going to be unanimous. Unless there are
> > other suggestions, or someone else beats me to it, I will call a vote
> > in 24 hours. I plan to keep it simple, mark X before the name that
> > appeals most to you.
> <snip/>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>.
On 8/8/05, Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/8/05, robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> <snip/>
> > IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about
> > the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a
> > consensus. opinions?
> <snap/>
Is there any interest in resolving the name issue as mentioned below?
I think everyone's perception of the methodology used is key to a
swift resolution, so it'd be nice to flesh out what the method should
be.
-Rahul
> While it
> would be nice, I doubt this is going to be unanimous. Unless there are
> other suggestions, or someone else beats me to it, I will call a vote
> in 24 hours. I plan to keep it simple, mark X before the name that
> appeals most to you.
<snip/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>.
On 8/8/05, robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
<snip/>
> IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about
> the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a
> consensus. opinions?
<snap/>
An informal thread was here [
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-general&m=111972374202676&w=2
], where I believe the majority opted for "Web Components". While it
would be nice, I doubt this is going to be unanimous. Unless there are
other suggestions, or someone else beats me to it, I will call a vote
in 24 hours. I plan to keep it simple, mark X before the name that
appeals most to you.
On 8/8/05, Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> > AIUI everything will be flat: collective management and only social
> > divisions. standard taglibs will become a jakarta sub-project.
>
> +1, I agree.
<snip/>
+1
On 8/8/05, Felipe Leme <ja...@felipeal.net> wrote:
<snip/>
> Regarding the other taglibs, I agree, it might make more sense for all
> of them to be direct sub-projects of the new project, instead of having
> an intermediate taglibs sub-project. But that's something we can decide
> later one - as we (the Jakarta Taglibs project) decided that we should
> create new taglibs from scratch (using the legacy code), the structure
> wouldn't matter at this point.
<snap/>
I will call a vote on taglibs-dev today. While it seems we are
agreeing on the flat hierarchy, this is, IMO, important enough to
close for the Taglibs project before moving forward.
-Rahul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Felipe Leme <ja...@felipeal.net>.
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
> point)... It seems like there might be a risk of sub-projects within
> sub-projects within sub-projects, which I'm not sure would be the best
> organizational stucture... if you had Jakarta Taglibs as a sub-component
> of the JWP4J project (assume for the sake of argument that name sticks),
> and then have Jakarta Standard Taglib as a sub-project of Jakarta Taglibs,
> is that the best structure to have? How deep of a hierarchy is OK and how
> deep is too deep?
Right now, the Standard is already a sub-project of the Jakarta Taglibs.
So, what we meant (sorry for the confusion) is that the Standard
wouldn't be migrated to this new project; instead, it would be a Jakarta
sub-project, sibling of the new project.
Regarding the other taglibs, I agree, it might make more sense for all
of them to be direct sub-projects of the new project, instead of having
an intermediate taglibs sub-project. But that's something we can decide
later one - as we (the Jakarta Taglibs project) decided that we should
create new taglibs from scratch (using the legacy code), the structure
wouldn't matter at this point.
> My own JWP project has a taglib package that has individual taglibs within
> it (AjaxTags, BasicString, etc), so I have the same thing going on... I
> personally wouldn't go beyond 3-levels like this, and I just wanted to
> raise the issue now before anything actually moves forward in case others
> have thoughts on this.
I agree - sometimes it makes more sense to aggregate components by
functionality than classes. For instance, we could have a Security
sub-project which would produce taglibs (like a PageGuardTag), filters
and even Struts actions.
-- Felipe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> AIUI everything will be flat: collective management and only social
> divisions. standard taglibs will become a jakarta sub-project.
+1, I agree.
> BTW is there any real reason not to start the promotion process for
> standard taglibs ASAP?
None that I can see.
There's a big shopping list of Jakarta rearrangements that have been
desired over the last couple of years that I want to email about soon, as
soon as I get back into the swing of things (currently ill and
convalescing at home).
Nothing too scary; HttpClient, Tomcat, Slide, JCS all need moving; Taglibs
now too. Probably others.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 13:14 -0400, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
> On Mon, August 8, 2005 12:42 pm, robert burrell donkin said:
> > On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 01:54 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote:
<snip>
> >> Anyway, the Jakarta Taglib Project has voted how it would like to take
> >> part on this new project, and the result was:
> >>
> >> 1.The Jakarta Taglibs Project would like to be merged into the project
> >> 2.The Jakarta Standard Taglib should then be a project of its own
> >> 3.The remaining taglibs would be gradually migrated to the new project,
> >> the most actives first
> >> 4.It's not decided yet if the migrated taglibs would have a newer
> >> release prior to the migration
>
> I'm not sure there was ever a consensus on what the overall structure of
> the project would be either (someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that
> point)... It seems like there might be a risk of sub-projects within
> sub-projects within sub-projects, which I'm not sure would be the best
> organizational stucture... if you had Jakarta Taglibs as a sub-component
> of the JWP4J project (assume for the sake of argument that name sticks),
> and then have Jakarta Standard Taglib as a sub-project of Jakarta Taglibs,
> is that the best structure to have? How deep of a hierarchy is OK and how
> deep is too deep?
any deep is too deep :)
AIUI everything will be flat: collective management and only social
divisions. standard taglibs will become a jakarta sub-project.
BTW is there any real reason not to start the promotion process for
standard taglibs ASAP?
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by "Frank W. Zammetti" <fz...@omnytex.com>.
On Mon, August 8, 2005 12:42 pm, robert burrell donkin said:
> On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 01:54 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> What's the status on the new project proposal? Has the discussion moved
>> to another list or has it just staled?
>
> in a holding pattern:
>
> IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about
> the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a
> consensus. opinions?
Progress on this project seemed to kind of stop, based on posts about it,
about two weeks ago. As Robert indicates, there was never any consensus
on the name. There were a bunch of options and comments listed on the
Wiki page:
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/CreatingCommonsForWebComponents
...but the discussion seemed to kind of fade away.
My personal favorite off that list was Jakarta Web Parts For Java (JWP4J).
It has the virtue of sounding like some other Apache/OSS projects (Log4J,
SOAP4J, ws-wsrp4j, etc). It has the problem however of being almost
identical to my own Java Web Parts project. I still have an interest in
donating my work to the foundation, and that would start with the name if
so desired, but I still have concerns about such a donation that might
make choosing a different name more prudent.
>> Anyway, the Jakarta Taglib Project has voted how it would like to take
>> part on this new project, and the result was:
>>
>> 1.The Jakarta Taglibs Project would like to be merged into the project
>> 2.The Jakarta Standard Taglib should then be a project of its own
>> 3.The remaining taglibs would be gradually migrated to the new project,
>> the most actives first
>> 4.It's not decided yet if the migrated taglibs would have a newer
>> release prior to the migration
I'm not sure there was ever a consensus on what the overall structure of
the project would be either (someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that
point)... It seems like there might be a risk of sub-projects within
sub-projects within sub-projects, which I'm not sure would be the best
organizational stucture... if you had Jakarta Taglibs as a sub-component
of the JWP4J project (assume for the sake of argument that name sticks),
and then have Jakarta Standard Taglib as a sub-project of Jakarta Taglibs,
is that the best structure to have? How deep of a hierarchy is OK and how
deep is too deep?
My own JWP project has a taglib package that has individual taglibs within
it (AjaxTags, BasicString, etc), so I have the same thing going on... I
personally wouldn't go beyond 3-levels like this, and I just wanted to
raise the issue now before anything actually moves forward in case others
have thoughts on this.
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Web Components/Common project
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 01:54 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> What's the status on the new project proposal? Has the discussion moved
> to another list or has it just staled?
in a holding pattern:
IMO the proposal can be finished off pretty quickly but i'm unsure about
the best way to handle the name issue. didn't seem to be any sort of a
consensus. opinions?
> Anyway, the Jakarta Taglib Project has voted how it would like to take
> part on this new project, and the result was:
>
> 1.The Jakarta Taglibs Project would like to be merged into the project
> 2.The Jakarta Standard Taglib should then be a project of its own
> 3.The remaining taglibs would be gradually migrated to the new project,
> the most actives first
> 4.It's not decided yet if the migrated taglibs would have a newer
> release prior to the migration
cool
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org