You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org> on 2002/10/21 12:05:36 UTC
Re: Naming issues
Sander Striker wrote:
>>From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:nicolaken@apache.org]
>>Sent: 21 October 2002 10:54
>
>
> [...]
>
>>I agree that what you say is the most sensible and correct way...
>>
>>The reality is that this *will* create tensions and flamewars.
>
> Like we're seeing on reorg@.
Then you've seen nothing yet ;-)
>>Defining a different namespace will just make things easier, by avoiding
>>stupid discussions like the one that is happening now, because there
>>*are* people that just want to break balls as we say.
>
>
> *nod*
>
>
>>IMHO using
>>
>> org.apache.common.*
>>
>>is a possible solution.
>>
>>Also, when I say common_s_ I kept making errors in declarations because
>>I expected "common" since it's a "common" namespace, not a "commons"
>>namespace.
>
>
> Well, I find 'common' not too far off to object to it. We just have
> to make sure that it is well explained* what the Common PMC is about,
> since I can already see the confusion in such a name...
;-)
> It does feel like jumping through hoops though to fix earlier mistakes.
Feels? ;-) It *is* hehehe
> Therefor I still think Jakarta Commons should fix their naming scheme.
> But that will have to be brought up there, not here.
It's completely impractical, and will hurt Jakarta immensely.
Oh, well, now that I think of it, this is only for projects that have
already been released...
Other opinions?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:05:36PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>>>The reality is that this *will* create tensions and flamewars.
>>>
>>>Like we're seeing on reorg@.
>>
>>Then you've seen nothing yet ;-)
>
> Wait, you think that's normal?
Unfortunately it's way too common :-(
I don't think it's normal, and this is one of the reasons I *definately*
prefer to discuss things on XML rather than Jakarta because of this.
:-/
I have been bit quite a lot of times with these things, and this is the
reason I try to avoid them.
But I will certainly follow you if you and others decide to stand up
against these tensions, but ATM I'm not (yet) capable of making them
settle while remaining a minority.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:05:36PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>>>The reality is that this *will* create tensions and flamewars.
>>>
>>>Like we're seeing on reorg@.
>>
>>Then you've seen nothing yet ;-)
>
> Wait, you think that's normal?
Unfortunately it's way too common :-(
I don't think it's normal, and this is one of the reasons I *definately*
prefer to discuss things on XML rather than Jakarta because of this.
:-/
I have been bit quite a lot of times with these things, and this is the
reason I try to avoid them.
But I will certainly follow you if you and others decide to stand up
against these tensions, but ATM I'm not (yet) capable of making them
settle while remaining a minority.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:05:36PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>The reality is that this *will* create tensions and flamewars.
> >
> >Like we're seeing on reorg@.
>
> Then you've seen nothing yet ;-)
Wait, you think that's normal?
-aaron
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:05:36PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>The reality is that this *will* create tensions and flamewars.
> >
> >Like we're seeing on reorg@.
>
> Then you've seen nothing yet ;-)
Wait, you think that's normal?
-aaron
Re: Naming issues
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
> >>The reality is that this *will* create tensions and flamewars.
> >
> > Like we're seeing on reorg@.
>
> Then you've seen nothing yet ;-)
>
+1 :-)
I used to be deeply disturbed and upset by them.. Pier taught me to
accept them....
To note... on reorg out of the flames came a great compromise proposal!
It addressed all of our concerns. I'm sure there will be more hashing
it out, but its good!
-Andy
--
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>
>>dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>>
>>>>>Therefor I still think Jakarta Commons should fix their naming scheme.
>>>>>But that will have to be brought up there, not here.
>>>>
>>>>It's completely impractical, and will hurt Jakarta immensely.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, well, now that I think of it, this is only for projects that have
>>>>already been released...
>>>>
>>>>Other opinions?
>>>
>>>Has everyone forgotten that it's not just commons that uses
>>>org.apache.<projectName> as their java package name within Jakarta.
>>>
>>>>Ant is org.apache.tools.ant
>>>
>>>Turbine is org.apache.turbine
>>>Velocity is org.apache.velocity
>>>Struts is org.apache.struts
>>>etc.
>>
>>Sure, and Turbine will get a turbine.apache.org site, Ant an
>>ant.apache.org site... but Commons?
>
> Bear in mind this is not just a website change. It breaks backwards
> compatibility of all jakarta projects [at least ones people code against]
> and will be confusing to users.
Exactly what I said ;-)
Citing myself: "It's completely impractical, and will hurt Jakarta
immensely."
I wanted to highlight how following the other projects in the migration
would effectively look like all code from Jakarta Commons should go into
Apache Commons... hinting that instead of changing packagenames we could
change project. A provocation, but still a possibility.
>>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
>>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
>
>
> Some of the Sandbox ones are blatant Commons projects which just aren't
> ready yet. I know that this is probably acceptable to the Incubator
> concept but wanted to make sure.
Yes, in fact I'm ready to move to incubator the code of Morphos, which
has some interested developers, two semi-active developers and no
community yet.
> Equally, when does something go from Incubator to Commons? In Jakarta it
> seems to be on release of a 1.0. Do things have to stay in Incubator until
> they have a 1.0 release?
When the community is deemed to be ready, that is when it works well
following the Apache Project Guidelines, both in facts and spirit.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> >>>Therefor I still think Jakarta Commons should fix their naming scheme.
> >>>But that will have to be brought up there, not here.
> >>
> >>It's completely impractical, and will hurt Jakarta immensely.
> >>
> >>Oh, well, now that I think of it, this is only for projects that have
> >>already been released...
> >>
> >>Other opinions?
> >
> > Has everyone forgotten that it's not just commons that uses
> > org.apache.<projectName> as their java package name within Jakarta.
> > > Ant is org.apache.tools.ant
> > Turbine is org.apache.turbine
> > Velocity is org.apache.velocity
> > Struts is org.apache.struts
> > etc.
>
> Sure, and Turbine will get a turbine.apache.org site, Ant an
> ant.apache.org site... but Commons?
Bear in mind this is not just a website change. It breaks backwards
compatibility of all jakarta projects [at least ones people code against]
and will be confusing to users.
> Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
Some of the Sandbox ones are blatant Commons projects which just aren't
ready yet. I know that this is probably acceptable to the Incubator
concept but wanted to make sure.
Equally, when does something go from Incubator to Commons? In Jakarta it
seems to be on release of a 1.0. Do things have to stay in Incubator until
they have a 1.0 release?
Hen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
[...]
> Now, if Apache Commons were
> 1) Just a 'federation' of commons type Apache projects (as per the original
> reorg proposal)
> 2) Not called commons
> that'd be just grand.
1) That's further along the read probably,
what we get now are projects, as the current way.
2) Yeah! :-D
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
> I can see some good use of an apache-commons :
>
> 1) Projects that are implementing eg RFC's that is not language related
> can commonly discuss implementations, have their API's (where usefull)
> about the same.
> 2) Joining expertise
> 3) Clear for the outside : want an http common implementation go to
> http://blah and you find all the possible implementations there
Part of the issue is about the different *types* of (sub sub) projects we
have in (jakarta) commons. Collections/IO/Util/Pattern/Lang potentially make
quite a close group (eg. same committers). JXpath/CLI/HttpClient are much
more independent of each other, just sharing the same space (eg. different
committers for each). Apache commons doesn't help this, it makes it worse.
> 1) Decisions will be a great pain, unless the specific languages can
> acutally make decisions on their own.
> 2) It can get messy in ML's with language specific issues, not even
> speaking about not very interesting commits from the c part of the
> project
I would set my mail filter so all C and Perl messages go straight to trash.
> apache-commons should be there for the outside and for joining
> expertise, so mainly containing a website + mailinglists.
> This way nothing changes, just some things get added.
> The problem with this can be however who will bring parties together in
> such an effort ;))
Now, if Apache Commons were
1) Just a 'federation' of commons type Apache projects (as per the original
reorg proposal)
2) Not called commons
that'd be just grand.
Stephen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net>.
I can see some good use of an apache-commons :
1) Projects that are implementing eg RFC's that is not language related
can commonly discuss implementations, have their API's (where usefull)
about the same.
2) Joining expertise
3) Clear for the outside : want an http common implementation go to
http://blah and you find all the possible implementations there
And some bad :
1) Decisions will be a great pain, unless the specific languages can
acutally make decisions on their own.
2) It can get messy in ML's with language specific issues, not even
speaking about not very interesting commits from the c part of the
project
So I come to my conculsion :
apache-commons should be there for the outside and for joining
expertise, so mainly containing a website + mailinglists.
This way nothing changes, just some things get added.
The problem with this can be however who will bring parties together in
such an effort ;))
Just a mind spin here..
Mvgr,
Martin
On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 21:46, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> But Nicola Ken, the basic problem is that I don't support the merging of a
> Java commons with a non-Java commons. There are way too many issues
> generated and few if any benefits. So, I should spend even more of my time
> subscribing to yet another list, to get another 50 emails a day, just to say
> no.
>
> And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity to vote on it. Its being
> presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read your email about it not
> being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that way).
>
> This 'reorg' is going to be very community destroying before long.
>
> Stephen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
> To: "Jakarta General List" <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
> Cc: <co...@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 8:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Naming issues
>
>
> >
> > Michael A. Smith wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > >
> > >>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> > >>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
> > >>
> > >>This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
> > >>Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project
> creation.
> > >>
> > >> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> > > As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> > > a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> > > something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> > > so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> > > defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
> >
> > Yeah, that's why I posted it here!
> >
> > Come on guys, come over to general@commons.apache.org, let's make
> > ourselves heard, help create the rules there, so finally Commons can
> > have it's top-level project!
> >
> > It's not something that has to be imposed, we can help over there!
> >
> > general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> >
> > > hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> > > strange.
> >
> > hehehe, when I cross-posted ;-)
> >
> > Oh, and now I'm at it, here it goes, welcome to the discussion
> > commons-dev! :-D
> >
> > --
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> > - verba volant, scripta manent -
> > (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Morgan Delagrange <md...@yahoo.com>.
--- Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
<snip/>
> > And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity
> to vote on it. Its being
> > presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read
> your email about it not
> > being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that
> way).
>
> There is a certain, "you can go your own way, but we
> feel we're bigger
> than you" feeling. Maybe we're just defensive
> though?
>
> Hen
>
To me, it's all hopelessly vague at this point. There
are no details as to how components are accepted,
decisions made, etc. I wrote an email today on the
reorg list trying to encourage elaboration from the
Apache Commons folks, but so far no responses.
I think it's pretty silly that they started the party
and then sent out the invitations. They shouldn't be
surprised when people don't show.
- Morgan
=====
Morgan Delagrange
http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
http://axion.tigris.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/watchdog
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> But Nicola Ken, the basic problem is that I don't support the merging of a
> Java commons with a non-Java commons. There are way too many issues
> generated and few if any benefits. So, I should spend even more of my time
> subscribing to yet another list, to get another 50 emails a day, just to say
> no.
Yep. The reorg itself isn't bad and the Incubator is a good idea
[commons-sandbox is failing in that respect in my opinion]. But I'm left
wondering why a joint Commons if we make the assumption that I believe in:
1) Sharing a mailing list with other languages is not going to help me. It
might help tomcat and httpd, but not the areas I'm involved in.
I've looked at APR to nick ideas for Java utilities. It really just
doesn't map.
2) Sharing a CVS module will be painful.
3) Sharing a website will be painful.
Once those three axioms are accepted, there is no project community, and
therefore no point for the apache-commons project.
I need to post this to apache-commons methinks :)
> And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity to vote on it. Its being
> presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read your email about it not
> being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that way).
There is a certain, "you can go your own way, but we feel we're bigger
than you" feeling. Maybe we're just defensive though?
Hen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
But Nicola Ken, the basic problem is that I don't support the merging of a
Java commons with a non-Java commons. There are way too many issues
generated and few if any benefits. So, I should spend even more of my time
subscribing to yet another list, to get another 50 emails a day, just to say
no.
And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity to vote on it. Its being
presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read your email about it not
being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that way).
This 'reorg' is going to be very community destroying before long.
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
To: "Jakarta General List" <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Cc: <co...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: Naming issues
>
> Michael A. Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >
> >>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> >>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
> >>
> >>This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
> >>Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project
creation.
> >>
> >> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
> > As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> > a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> > something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> > so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> > defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
>
> Yeah, that's why I posted it here!
>
> Come on guys, come over to general@commons.apache.org, let's make
> ourselves heard, help create the rules there, so finally Commons can
> have it's top-level project!
>
> It's not something that has to be imposed, we can help over there!
>
> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
> > hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> > strange.
>
> hehehe, when I cross-posted ;-)
>
> Oh, and now I'm at it, here it goes, welcome to the discussion
> commons-dev! :-D
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Michael A. Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
>>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
>>
>>This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
>>Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project creation.
>>
>> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
>
> As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
Yeah, that's why I posted it here!
Come on guys, come over to general@commons.apache.org, let's make
ourselves heard, help create the rules there, so finally Commons can
have it's top-level project!
It's not something that has to be imposed, we can help over there!
general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> strange.
hehehe, when I cross-posted ;-)
Oh, and now I'm at it, here it goes, welcome to the discussion
commons-dev! :-D
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Michael A. Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
>>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
>>
>>This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
>>Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project creation.
>>
>> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
>
> As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
Yeah, that's why I posted it here!
Come on guys, come over to general@commons.apache.org, let's make
ourselves heard, help create the rules there, so finally Commons can
have it's top-level project!
It's not something that has to be imposed, we can help over there!
general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> strange.
hehehe, when I cross-posted ;-)
Oh, and now I'm at it, here it goes, welcome to the discussion
commons-dev! :-D
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Michael A. Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> > the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
> >
> > This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
> > Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project creation.
> >
> > general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
> As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
>
> hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> strange.
Yeah, it tricked me too :)
Moving Jakarta Commons stuff to Apache Commons stuff scares me if the
people in charge of Apache Commons don't seem to 'get' Java. I suspect
they're all reasonable people, but it's too easy to think of scary demands
that might be made.
Such as all Jakarta Commons must change dpackage names. This is gonna be a
very bad experience for users. [Okay, I'm sounding like a scratch record.
[What scares me is that I couldn't remember that phrase and was thinking
'for loop'] ].
Hen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
>
> This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
> Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project creation.
>
> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
strange.
regards,
michael
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>>>Therefor I still think Jakarta Commons should fix their naming scheme.
>>>But that will have to be brought up there, not here.
>>
>>It's completely impractical, and will hurt Jakarta immensely.
>>
>>Oh, well, now that I think of it, this is only for projects that have
>>already been released...
>>
>>Other opinions?
>
> Has everyone forgotten that it's not just commons that uses
> org.apache.<projectName> as their java package name within Jakarta.
> > Ant is org.apache.tools.ant
> Turbine is org.apache.turbine
> Velocity is org.apache.velocity
> Struts is org.apache.struts
> etc.
Sure, and Turbine will get a turbine.apache.org site, Ant an
ant.apache.org site... but Commons?
Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project creation.
general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
For the incubator the mailing list is not yet ready, will be soon. :-)
> I don't see a realistic proposal being made that renames all of the
> Jakarta Project source code.
Why do you think I posted this message here? *grrrrr*
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Naming issues
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
> > Therefor I still think Jakarta Commons should fix their naming scheme.
> > But that will have to be brought up there, not here.
>
> It's completely impractical, and will hurt Jakarta immensely.
>
> Oh, well, now that I think of it, this is only for projects that have
> already been released...
>
> Other opinions?
Has everyone forgotten that it's not just commons that uses
org.apache.<projectName> as their java package name within Jakarta.
Ant is org.apache.tools.ant
Turbine is org.apache.turbine
Velocity is org.apache.velocity
Struts is org.apache.struts
etc.
I don't see a realistic proposal being made that renames all of the
Jakarta Project source code.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>