You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com> on 2013/11/29 14:24:40 UTC
[all] Removing websites of dormant components
On 19.10. I wrote a mail in response to Henri Yandell.
http://markmail.org/message/c63kqyipuy6islib
I would like to follow up on the issues i mentioned there.
Our dormant components are unmaintained and our dormant websites are
broken.
Therefore I would like to remove the websites.
In example we are having this critical and wellknown security problem:
http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/225657
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/javacpujun2013-1899847.html
At all these pages:
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/cache/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/contract/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/convert/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/events/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/feedparser/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/jjar/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/latka/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/mapper/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/messenger/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/resources/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/scaffold/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/threadpool/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/workflow/apidocs/index.html
http://commons.apache.org/dormant/xmlio/apidocs/index.html
In addition none of the dormant components are respecting the trademark
branding guidelines:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
If there is nobody who wants to fix these within a short timeframe
I believe we should remove the websites from our server and forwarding
it to maybe a wiki page which explains that docs of dormant components
can only be retrieved by checking out the source code.
Cheers,
Christian
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@sandglass-software.com>.
You can remove the dormant convert. A new version is in the sandbox and
I doubt anything will be done with the dormant version.
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 11/29/2013 8:24 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On 19.10. I wrote a mail in response to Henri Yandell.
> http://markmail.org/message/c63kqyipuy6islib
>
> I would like to follow up on the issues i mentioned there.
>
> Our dormant components are unmaintained and our dormant websites are
> broken.
> Therefore I would like to remove the websites.
>
> In example we are having this critical and wellknown security problem:
> http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/225657
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/javacpujun2013-1899847.html
>
>
> At all these pages:
>
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/cache/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/contract/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/convert/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/events/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/feedparser/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/jjar/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/latka/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/mapper/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/messenger/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/resources/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/scaffold/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/threadpool/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/workflow/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/xmlio/apidocs/index.html
>
> In addition none of the dormant components are respecting the trademark
> branding guidelines:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
>
> If there is nobody who wants to fix these within a short timeframe
> I believe we should remove the websites from our server and forwarding
> it to maybe a wiki page which explains that docs of dormant components
> can only be retrieved by checking out the source code.
>
> Cheers,
> Christian
>
>
>
> ---
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> @grobmeier
> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
Le 04/12/2013 09:35, Christian Grobmeier a écrit :
> No objections or no interest?
> A few more comments would have been helpful.
>
> I am going to remove all dormant javadocs on friday or saturday.
>
> Not sure on the branding though. It is the responsibility of the PMC to
> take care of trademarks.
> Comments are welcome.
What about running the Javadoc fix tool instead?
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/java-doc-updater-tool-1955731.html
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
I think we should keep the lights on, but no more. So sites should exist to
that level.
What is the minimum needed on the site for a dormant project?
Pointer to this list, explanation of what it is/was, pointer to old
releases and to the location of the source history.
I'm torn on javadoc; I don't think it's required, but it's also so useful
when you can find it online and not have to dig open a tar.gz. See my
comment on another thread about centralizing javadoc - if we did that, then
dormant javadoc wouldn't have an incremental cost with each component. I'm
happy to volunteer to work on such a centralized wossname.
Hen
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Niall Pemberton
<ni...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I have no objection.
>
> Niall
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > No objections or no interest?
> > A few more comments would have been helpful.
> >
> > I am going to remove all dormant javadocs on friday or saturday.
> >
> > Not sure on the branding though. It is the responsibility of the PMC to
> > take care of trademarks.
> > Comments are welcome.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 29 Nov 2013, at 20:37, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> >
> > On 29 Nov 2013, at 19:21, sebb wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree that the Javadoc pages could be removed.
> >>> Although it would not be difficult to fix the individual pages,
> >>> there's not much point in fixing Javadoc for dormant components.
> >>>
> >>> However I'm not sure it makes sense to delete the entire website
> >>> because of the branding issues.
> >>> What are the particular branding issues that you think need fixing?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Footer is not correct, should be like:
> >>
> >> "Apache Foo, Foo, Apache, the Apache feather logo, and the Apache Foo
> >> project logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of The
> Apache
> >> Software Foundation in the United States and other countries."
> >>
> >> First mention of a trademark should be with Apache, like Apache xmlio
> >> (not only xmlio).
> >>
> >> There are surely more things. I am not sure if it really helps to remove
> >> the website alone. People could refer to their own build when it comes
> to
> >> legal problems and indicate their only source is doing $x. Not really an
> >> expert on these things. However I would like to have us compliant to the
> >> branding recommendation.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>> Christian
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> http://www.grobmeier.de
> >>>> @grobmeier
> >>>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> http://www.grobmeier.de
> >> @grobmeier
> >> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---
> > http://www.grobmeier.de
> > @grobmeier
> > GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
I have no objection.
Niall
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> No objections or no interest?
> A few more comments would have been helpful.
>
> I am going to remove all dormant javadocs on friday or saturday.
>
> Not sure on the branding though. It is the responsibility of the PMC to
> take care of trademarks.
> Comments are welcome.
>
>
>
>
> On 29 Nov 2013, at 20:37, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
> On 29 Nov 2013, at 19:21, sebb wrote:
>>
>> I agree that the Javadoc pages could be removed.
>>> Although it would not be difficult to fix the individual pages,
>>> there's not much point in fixing Javadoc for dormant components.
>>>
>>> However I'm not sure it makes sense to delete the entire website
>>> because of the branding issues.
>>> What are the particular branding issues that you think need fixing?
>>>
>>
>> Footer is not correct, should be like:
>>
>> "Apache Foo, Foo, Apache, the Apache feather logo, and the Apache Foo
>> project logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of The Apache
>> Software Foundation in the United States and other countries."
>>
>> First mention of a trademark should be with Apache, like Apache xmlio
>> (not only xmlio).
>>
>> There are surely more things. I am not sure if it really helps to remove
>> the website alone. People could refer to their own build when it comes to
>> legal problems and indicate their only source is doing $x. Not really an
>> expert on these things. However I would like to have us compliant to the
>> branding recommendation.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>>>> @grobmeier
>>>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> @grobmeier
>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>>
>
>
> ---
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> @grobmeier
> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
No objections or no interest?
A few more comments would have been helpful.
I am going to remove all dormant javadocs on friday or saturday.
Not sure on the branding though. It is the responsibility of the PMC to
take care of trademarks.
Comments are welcome.
On 29 Nov 2013, at 20:37, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On 29 Nov 2013, at 19:21, sebb wrote:
>
>> I agree that the Javadoc pages could be removed.
>> Although it would not be difficult to fix the individual pages,
>> there's not much point in fixing Javadoc for dormant components.
>>
>> However I'm not sure it makes sense to delete the entire website
>> because of the branding issues.
>> What are the particular branding issues that you think need fixing?
>
> Footer is not correct, should be like:
>
> "Apache Foo, Foo, Apache, the Apache feather logo, and the Apache Foo
> project logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of The
> Apache Software Foundation in the United States and other countries."
>
> First mention of a trademark should be with Apache, like Apache xmlio
> (not only xmlio).
>
> There are surely more things. I am not sure if it really helps to
> remove the website alone. People could refer to their own build when
> it comes to legal problems and indicate their only source is doing $x.
> Not really an expert on these things. However I would like to have us
> compliant to the branding recommendation.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Christian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>>> @grobmeier
>>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
> ---
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> @grobmeier
> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
On 29 Nov 2013, at 19:21, sebb wrote:
> I agree that the Javadoc pages could be removed.
> Although it would not be difficult to fix the individual pages,
> there's not much point in fixing Javadoc for dormant components.
>
> However I'm not sure it makes sense to delete the entire website
> because of the branding issues.
> What are the particular branding issues that you think need fixing?
Footer is not correct, should be like:
"Apache Foo, Foo, Apache, the Apache feather logo, and the Apache Foo
project logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of The
Apache Software Foundation in the United States and other countries."
First mention of a trademark should be with Apache, like Apache xmlio
(not only xmlio).
There are surely more things. I am not sure if it really helps to remove
the website alone. People could refer to their own build when it comes
to legal problems and indicate their only source is doing $x. Not really
an expert on these things. However I would like to have us compliant to
the branding recommendation.
Cheers
>
>> Cheers,
>> Christian
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> @grobmeier
>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [all] Removing websites of dormant components
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 29 November 2013 13:24, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19.10. I wrote a mail in response to Henri Yandell.
> http://markmail.org/message/c63kqyipuy6islib
>
> I would like to follow up on the issues i mentioned there.
>
> Our dormant components are unmaintained and our dormant websites are broken.
> Therefore I would like to remove the websites.
>
> In example we are having this critical and wellknown security problem:
> http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/225657
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/javacpujun2013-1899847.html
>
> At all these pages:
>
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/cache/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/contract/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/convert/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/events/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/feedparser/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/jjar/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/latka/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/mapper/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/messenger/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/resources/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/scaffold/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/threadpool/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/workflow/apidocs/index.html
> http://commons.apache.org/dormant/xmlio/apidocs/index.html
>
> In addition none of the dormant components are respecting the trademark
> branding guidelines:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
>
> If there is nobody who wants to fix these within a short timeframe
> I believe we should remove the websites from our server and forwarding
> it to maybe a wiki page which explains that docs of dormant components
> can only be retrieved by checking out the source code.
I agree that the Javadoc pages could be removed.
Although it would not be difficult to fix the individual pages,
there's not much point in fixing Javadoc for dormant components.
However I'm not sure it makes sense to delete the entire website
because of the branding issues.
What are the particular branding issues that you think need fixing?
> Cheers,
> Christian
>
>
>
> ---
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> @grobmeier
> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org