You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-dev@james.apache.org by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org> on 2002/10/30 18:46:44 UTC
[VOTE] James as an official Apache project
All,
Now that we've had a chance to digest whats meant by a top level project, I'll subject you to my opinion, which I've held back so far.
Basically I'm in favour of proposing james as an apache top level project (tlp), I'm prepared to take the lead on our proposal, and here's why:
James has a small yet mature community, we seldom seek recourse to the jakarta PMC, and equally seldom are we scrutinised by them. We are not the most active project, and I feel that this sometimes causes James to be disregarded. Likewise, apart from Avalon, we have few direct ties with other jakarta projects, and little in common apart from the language/platform and culture (but the culture is Apache)
The tlp issue is more about management than web-site and mail addresses, I don't believe that james.apache.org will bring many benefits, but I do think that normalising our managerial relationship with Jakarta by becoming a sibling rather than a child, and taking official control of all the issues we currently inherit and "interpret" from Jakarta would benefit James. The James PMC would be responsible to The Board.
I do believe that Jakarta is becoming too big to function as a single project, that community and culture become diluted as you descend the heirarchy and that one solution is for mature projects leave the nest. Of course other projects are free to make their own choices but as James consists primarily of the server which is an end-user product I feel that top level project status, emphasisng its purpose rather then its technology, would suit it well.
The proposals being discussed on reorg & community include the notion of federated projects, James, with the approval of the Jakarta PMC, could continue to be associated with Jakarta, I would like to think that we wouldn't be leaving Jakarta, just growing up. I also know that James would continue to rely on Jakarta for code, insight and cool thinking, but we don't need to be a Jakarta sub-project for that.
It would also give us the opportunity, as Serge mentioned, to better promote our sub-projects, theres Mailet, and mailets, and there are the beginings of full blown mailet applications.
So.. we've had time to examine the issues, lets vote..
Should we prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James be elevated to a top level project?
[ ] +1 I think it's a good idea
[ ] +0 I'll accept the majority decision, stop bothering me
[ ] -0 I have reservations
[ ] -1, I don't think its a good idea
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Danny Angus wrote:
> Should we prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James be elevated to a top level project?
>
> [ ] +1 I think it's a good idea
> [ ] +0 I'll accept the majority decision, stop bothering me
> [ ] -0 I have reservations
> [ ] -1, I don't think its a good idea
+1. Let me know if you need any help, if the community thinks it's a
good idea.
--
Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites
http://www.lokitech.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by David Jenkins <da...@mdcreate.com>.
+1 Here
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>All,
>
>Now that we've had a chance to digest whats meant by a top level project, I'll subject you to my opinion, which I've held back so far.
>
>Basically I'm in favour of proposing james as an apache top level project (tlp), I'm prepared to take the lead on our proposal, and here's why:
>
> James has a small yet mature community, we seldom seek recourse to the jakarta PMC, and equally seldom are we scrutinised by them. We are not the most active project, and I feel that this sometimes causes James to be disregarded. Likewise, apart from Avalon, we have few direct ties with other jakarta projects, and little in common apart from the language/platform and culture (but the culture is Apache)
>
>The tlp issue is more about management than web-site and mail addresses, I don't believe that james.apache.org will bring many benefits, but I do think that normalising our managerial relationship with Jakarta by becoming a sibling rather than a child, and taking official control of all the issues we currently inherit and "interpret" from Jakarta would benefit James. The James PMC would be responsible to The Board.
>
>I do believe that Jakarta is becoming too big to function as a single project, that community and culture become diluted as you descend the heirarchy and that one solution is for mature projects leave the nest. Of course other projects are free to make their own choices but as James consists primarily of the server which is an end-user product I feel that top level project status, emphasisng its purpose rather then its technology, would suit it well.
>
>The proposals being discussed on reorg & community include the notion of federated projects, James, with the approval of the Jakarta PMC, could continue to be associated with Jakarta, I would like to think that we wouldn't be leaving Jakarta, just growing up. I also know that James would continue to rely on Jakarta for code, insight and cool thinking, but we don't need to be a Jakarta sub-project for that.
>
>It would also give us the opportunity, as Serge mentioned, to better promote our sub-projects, theres Mailet, and mailets, and there are the beginings of full blown mailet applications.
>
>So.. we've had time to examine the issues, lets vote..
>
>Should we prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James be elevated to a top level project?
>
> [ ] +1 I think it's a good idea
> [ ] +0 I'll accept the majority decision, stop bothering me
> [ ] -0 I have reservations
> [ ] -1, I don't think its a good idea
>
>
+1
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:mcconnell@osm.net
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 18:46, Danny Angus wrote:
> Should we prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James be elevated to a top level project?
>
> [X] +1 I think it's a good idea
> [ ] +0 I'll accept the majority decision, stop bothering me
> [ ] -0 I have reservations
> [ ] -1, I don't think its a good idea
non-binding :)
cheers,
Leo Simons
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: JDBC MAIL and SPOOL
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
I'll do some testing, but since the listmessages query is keyed solely by
repository_name, I'd +1.
--- Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: Danny Angus [mailto:danny@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 6:44
To: James Developers List
Subject: JDBC MAIL and SPOOL
Hi,
messing around with performance I think that mail tables should be indexed
on repository_name, as well as having (repository_name,message_name) as the
PK.
anyone wanting to test this theory should run..
mysql> alter table [TABLENAME] add key repo (repository_name);
against your existing tables.
the patch for sql resources is:
C:\d\cvsdir\jakarta-james\src\conf>cvs -z9 diff -u sqlResources.xml
Index: sqlResources.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-james/src/conf/sqlResources.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.14
diff -u -r1.14 sqlResources.xml
--- sqlResources.xml 26 Aug 2002 18:53:17 -0000 1.14
+++ sqlResources.xml 1 Nov 2002 11:34:05 -0000
@@ -133,7 +133,8 @@
remote_addr varchar (20) NOT NULL ,
message_body longblob NOT NULL ,
last_updated datetime NOT NULL,
- PRIMARY KEY (message_name, repository_name)
+ PRIMARY KEY (message_name, repository_name),
+ KEY repo (repository_name)
)
</sql>
<sql name="createTable" db="hypersonic">
--
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>
JDBC MAIL and SPOOL
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
Hi,
messing around with performance I think that mail tables should be indexed on repository_name, as well as having (repository_name,message_name) as the PK.
anyone wanting to test this theory should run..
mysql> alter table [TABLENAME] add key repo (repository_name);
against your existing tables.
the patch for sql resources is:
C:\d\cvsdir\jakarta-james\src\conf>cvs -z9 diff -u sqlResources.xml
Index: sqlResources.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-james/src/conf/sqlResources.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.14
diff -u -r1.14 sqlResources.xml
--- sqlResources.xml 26 Aug 2002 18:53:17 -0000 1.14
+++ sqlResources.xml 1 Nov 2002 11:34:05 -0000
@@ -133,7 +133,8 @@
remote_addr varchar (20) NOT NULL ,
message_body longblob NOT NULL ,
last_updated datetime NOT NULL,
- PRIMARY KEY (message_name, repository_name)
+ PRIMARY KEY (message_name, repository_name),
+ KEY repo (repository_name)
)
</sql>
<sql name="createTable" db="hypersonic">
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Charles Benett <ch...@apache.org>.
+1
I suggest (like Noel) that the inital PMC is all committers.
Charles
Danny Angus wrote:
>All,
>
>Now that we've had a chance to digest whats meant by a top level project, I'll subject you to my opinion, which I've held back so far.
>
>Basically I'm in favour of proposing james as an apache top level project (tlp), I'm prepared to take the lead on our proposal, and here's why:
>
> James has a small yet mature community, we seldom seek recourse to the jakarta PMC, and equally seldom are we scrutinised by them. We are not the most active project, and I feel that this sometimes causes James to be disregarded. Likewise, apart from Avalon, we have few direct ties with other jakarta projects, and little in common apart from the language/platform and culture (but the culture is Apache)
>
>The tlp issue is more about management than web-site and mail addresses, I don't believe that james.apache.org will bring many benefits, but I do think that normalising our managerial relationship with Jakarta by becoming a sibling rather than a child, and taking official control of all the issues we currently inherit and "interpret" from Jakarta would benefit James. The James PMC would be responsible to The Board.
>
>I do believe that Jakarta is becoming too big to function as a single project, that community and culture become diluted as you descend the heirarchy and that one solution is for mature projects leave the nest. Of course other projects are free to make their own choices but as James consists primarily of the server which is an end-user product I feel that top level project status, emphasisng its purpose rather then its technology, would suit it well.
>
>The proposals being discussed on reorg & community include the notion of federated projects, James, with the approval of the Jakarta PMC, could continue to be associated with Jakarta, I would like to think that we wouldn't be leaving Jakarta, just growing up. I also know that James would continue to rely on Jakarta for code, insight and cool thinking, but we don't need to be a Jakarta sub-project for that.
>
>It would also give us the opportunity, as Serge mentioned, to better promote our sub-projects, theres Mailet, and mailets, and there are the beginings of full blown mailet applications.
>
>So.. we've had time to examine the issues, lets vote..
>
>Should we prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James be elevated to a top level project?
>
> [ ] +1 I think it's a good idea
> [ ] +0 I'll accept the majority decision, stop bothering me
> [ ] -0 I have reservations
> [ ] -1, I don't think its a good idea
>
>
>d.
>
>
>--
>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: JavaMail mime header parsing
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
pls submit this to bugzilla, its been on my radar for a while, but keeps slipping my mind.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Webb [mailto:jw@inovem.com]
> Sent: 01 November 2002 09:10
> To: 'James Developers List'
> Subject: RE: JavaMail mime header parsing
>
>
> We use Javamail 1.3 instead of 1.2. It's got a LOT of bug fixes in the
> Mime code and just seems to be more stable. I just changed the build.xml
> file and everything just works.
>
> So a thumbs up from me.
>
> -- Jason
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Serge Sozonoff [mailto:serge@globalbeach.com]
> > Sent: 31 October 2002 21:14
> > To: James Developers List
> > Subject: JavaMail mime header parsing
> >
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Sorry for this slightly off topic subject, hoping someone has
> > a simple answer.
> >
> > My understanding of RFC2045 section 3. MIME Header Fields
> > leaves me to beleive that both of the following
> > representations are correct:
> >
> > Content-Type: multipart/related;
> > boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type="application/smil";st
> > art="<89168876
> > 9>"
> > Content-Type: multipart/related;
> > boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type=application/smil;star
> > t=<891688769>
> >
> > Note that one has some double quotes and one does not.
> >
> > However when I run the non-quoted version through JavaMail
> > 1.2 and 1.3 I get a ParseException or MessagingException
> > depending on the operation I am doing. Is there a but in
> > JavaMail or is my understanding of the RFC wrong?
> >
> > Any thoughts on upgrading the JavaMail extension in James, I
> > beleive we are still using 1.2 (I have found no specific
> > reason for suggesting this, but there were some bug fixes and
> > it might benefit those using JavaMail for their mailets.
> >
> > Thanks, Serge
> >
> > Example code to see this in action
> >
> > import javax.mail.internet.*;
> >
> > class test {
> > public static void main(String[] args) {
> > try {
> > String header = "multipart/related;
> > boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type=application/smil;star
> > t=<891688769>"
> > ;
> > ContentType cType = new ContentType(header);
> > System.out.println(cType.toString());
> > } catch(ParseException pe) {
> > System.out.println("Parse error");
> > pe.getMessage();
> > }
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:james-dev-> unsubscribe@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: JavaMail mime header parsing
Posted by Jason Webb <jw...@inovem.com>.
We use Javamail 1.3 instead of 1.2. It's got a LOT of bug fixes in the
Mime code and just seems to be more stable. I just changed the build.xml
file and everything just works.
So a thumbs up from me.
-- Jason
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Serge Sozonoff [mailto:serge@globalbeach.com]
> Sent: 31 October 2002 21:14
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: JavaMail mime header parsing
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Sorry for this slightly off topic subject, hoping someone has
> a simple answer.
>
> My understanding of RFC2045 section 3. MIME Header Fields
> leaves me to beleive that both of the following
> representations are correct:
>
> Content-Type: multipart/related;
> boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type="application/smil";st
> art="<89168876
> 9>"
> Content-Type: multipart/related;
> boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type=application/smil;star
> t=<891688769>
>
> Note that one has some double quotes and one does not.
>
> However when I run the non-quoted version through JavaMail
> 1.2 and 1.3 I get a ParseException or MessagingException
> depending on the operation I am doing. Is there a but in
> JavaMail or is my understanding of the RFC wrong?
>
> Any thoughts on upgrading the JavaMail extension in James, I
> beleive we are still using 1.2 (I have found no specific
> reason for suggesting this, but there were some bug fixes and
> it might benefit those using JavaMail for their mailets.
>
> Thanks, Serge
>
> Example code to see this in action
>
> import javax.mail.internet.*;
>
> class test {
> public static void main(String[] args) {
> try {
> String header = "multipart/related;
> boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type=application/smil;star
> t=<891688769>"
> ;
> ContentType cType = new ContentType(header);
> System.out.println(cType.toString());
> } catch(ParseException pe) {
> System.out.println("Parse error");
> pe.getMessage();
> }
> }
> }
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:james-dev-> unsubscribe@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: JavaMail mime header parsing
Posted by "Peter M. Goldstein" <pe...@yahoo.com>.
Serge,
I'm not sure that's the relevant RFC. The type name/parameter pair is
not addressed in RFC 2045, since it's a parameter specific to the
multipart/related Content-Type.
That said, RFC 2387 which defines the Multipart/Related type, seems to
indicate that it's actually the unquoted version which is correct.
Check out section 3.4 of this RFC. Although it also seems to say that,
in general, parameters will be quoted.
--Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Serge Sozonoff [mailto:serge@globalbeach.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 1:14 PM
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: JavaMail mime header parsing
>
> Hi All,
>
> Sorry for this slightly off topic subject, hoping someone has a simple
> answer.
>
> My understanding of RFC2045 section 3. MIME Header Fields leaves me
to
> beleive that both of the following representations are correct:
>
> Content-Type: multipart/related;
> boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-
> 1;type="application/smil";start="<89168876
> 9>"
> Content-Type: multipart/related;
> boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-
> 1;type=application/smil;start=<891688769>
>
> Note that one has some double quotes and one does not.
>
> However when I run the non-quoted version through JavaMail 1.2 and 1.3
I
> get
> a ParseException or MessagingException depending on the operation I am
> doing.
> Is there a but in JavaMail or is my understanding of the RFC wrong?
>
> Any thoughts on upgrading the JavaMail extension in James, I beleive
we
> are
> still using 1.2 (I have found no specific reason for suggesting this,
but
> there were some bug fixes and it might benefit those using JavaMail
for
> their mailets.
>
> Thanks, Serge
>
> Example code to see this in action
>
> import javax.mail.internet.*;
>
> class test {
> public static void main(String[] args) {
> try {
> String header = "multipart/related;
> boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-
> 1;type=application/smil;start=<891688769>"
> ;
> ContentType cType = new ContentType(header);
> System.out.println(cType.toString());
> } catch(ParseException pe) {
> System.out.println("Parse error");
> pe.getMessage();
> }
> }
> }
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-
> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-
> help@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
JavaMail mime header parsing
Posted by Serge Sozonoff <se...@globalbeach.com>.
Hi All,
Sorry for this slightly off topic subject, hoping someone has a simple
answer.
My understanding of RFC2045 section 3. MIME Header Fields leaves me to
beleive that both of the following representations are correct:
Content-Type: multipart/related;
boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type="application/smil";start="<89168876
9>"
Content-Type: multipart/related;
boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type=application/smil;start=<891688769>
Note that one has some double quotes and one does not.
However when I run the non-quoted version through JavaMail 1.2 and 1.3 I get
a ParseException or MessagingException depending on the operation I am
doing.
Is there a but in JavaMail or is my understanding of the RFC wrong?
Any thoughts on upgrading the JavaMail extension in James, I beleive we are
still using 1.2 (I have found no specific reason for suggesting this, but
there were some bug fixes and it might benefit those using JavaMail for
their mailets.
Thanks, Serge
Example code to see this in action
import javax.mail.internet.*;
class test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
String header = "multipart/related;
boundary=mmsc-mgw-unique-boundary-1;type=application/smil;start=<891688769>"
;
ContentType cType = new ContentType(header);
System.out.println(cType.toString());
} catch(ParseException pe) {
System.out.println("Parse error");
pe.getMessage();
}
}
}
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Serge Sozonoff <se...@globalbeach.com>.
Hi All,
+1
Serge
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Angus" <da...@apache.org>
To: "James Developers List" <ja...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 6:55 PM
Subject: RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
PS...
Theres a tradition of people voting who's vote may not count, do that please
because I'd really like to hear from the whole community, not just the
commiters.
d.
--
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: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
PS...
Theres a tradition of people voting who's vote may not count, do that please because I'd really like to hear from the whole community, not just the commiters.
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Darrell DeBoer <da...@apache.org>.
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:52, Danny Angus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I haven't forgotten this, but have been sidetracked by real-life issues(!)
>
> So, to summarise, the results of the voting were in favour of the proposal
> "That we should prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James
> be elevated to a top level Apache project." as follows:
My very late +1
>
> Binding votes:
> +1
> Serge Knystautas
> Danny Angus
> Peter Goldstein
> Noel Bergman
> Charles Bennet
Darrell DeBoer
>
> +0 None
> -0 None
> -1 None
>
> Commiters who did not vote, or are inactive:
> Harmeet Bedi
> Darrell De Boer
> Peter Donald
> Paul Hammant
> Brendan Burns
> James Duncan Davidson
> Jon Scott Stevens
>
> Votes of support from the community:
>
> +1
> Stephen McConnell
> Brad Walker
> Scott Sanders
> Steve Short
> Alan Gerhard
> Leo Simons
> David Jenkins
> Jason Webb
> Dave Richardson
> Serge Sozonoff
> Chris Means
--
ciao,
Daz
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
I suggest we now prepare a proposal for submission,
to which end I suggest that I commit a draft, mainly just headings, and we can work on that.
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> I propose Serge to have the honor of being the initial PMC Chairman, and all
> Committers as the initial PMC, unless they wish to demure.
Thank you very much for the nomination. I would be extremely honored.
--
Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites
http://www.lokitech.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Harmeet Bedi <ha...@kodemuse.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>
>
> I propose Serge to have the honor of being the initial PMC Chairman.
+1.
Harmeet
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by "Peter M. Goldstein" <pe...@yahoo.com>.
All,
> I propose Serge to have the honor of being the initial PMC Chairman,
and
> all
> Committers as the initial PMC, unless they wish to demure.
+1
--Peter
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Danny,
No worries. Thinking about it the other day, I figured that we'd get onto
this in December after we shipped v2.1. It is nice of Stephen McConnell to
offer his assistance, having just participated in Avalon's successful
promotion.
I propose Serge to have the honor of being the initial PMC Chairman, and all
Committers as the initial PMC, unless they wish to demure.
Please note: next week is Thanksgiving in the USA. It is most likely that a
number of us will probably be off-line for extended periods.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I haven't forgotten this, but have been sidetracked by real-life issues(!)
So, to summarise, the results of the voting were in favour of the proposal
"That we should prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James be elevated to a top level Apache project."
as follows:
Binding votes:
+1
Serge Knystautas
Danny Angus
Peter Goldstein
Noel Bergman
Charles Bennet
+0 None
-0 None
-1 None
Commiters who did not vote, or are inactive:
Harmeet Bedi
Darrell De Boer
Peter Donald
Paul Hammant
Brendan Burns
James Duncan Davidson
Jon Scott Stevens
Votes of support from the community:
+1
Stephen McConnell
Brad Walker
Scott Sanders
Steve Short
Alan Gerhard
Leo Simons
David Jenkins
Jason Webb
Dave Richardson
Serge Sozonoff
Chris Means
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Phoenix 4.0.1
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> There is an observed issue with Red Hat Linux 6.2, Sun's 1.3.0 JVM, and
> this revision of Phoenix. This has been confirmed to be a JVM issue,
> and can be resolved by switching to either IBM's 1.3.1 JVM or Sun's 1.4
> JVM. Other than this issue there are no known platform/JVM
> incompatibilities.
Patch the JVM recommendations in the xdocs, before we forget.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Phoenix 4.0.1
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
It runs with J2SDK 1.4.1_01 for linux and IBM JVM 1.3.1 for linux. I can't
speak to any other release, so hopefully others will test and reply.
--- Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: Danny Angus [mailto:danny@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 12:25
To: James Developers List
Subject: RE: Phoenix 4.0.1
does this version of phoenix run with the -server option on sun j2sdk1.4.0 ?
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Phoenix 4.0.1
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
does this version of phoenix run with the -server option on sun j2sdk1.4.0 ?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter M. Goldstein [mailto:peter_m_goldstein@yahoo.com]
> Sent: 30 October 2002 21:18
> To: 'James Developers List'
> Subject: Phoenix 4.0.1
>
>
>
> All,
>
> I've just checked in the Phoenix 4.0.1 version. It resolves the logging
> bug (all log entries go to a single file) that was introduced in the
> Phoenix 4.0 release version.
>
> I've been building and running with this version successfully on a
> Windows 2k box for over a week now. Noel has tested it on Linux, and
> found that it runs successfully there.
>
> I have also changed the build.xml so that deprecation warnings are
> turned off. With this upgrade the number of Component related
> deprecation warnings goes up to 200+. IMHO that's just really annoying.
> So I flipped them off until we do the upgrade to
> Serviceable/ServiceManager in the next rev.
>
> There is an observed issue with Red Hat Linux 6.2, Sun's 1.3.0 JVM, and
> this revision of Phoenix. This has been confirmed to be a JVM issue,
> and can be resolved by switching to either IBM's 1.3.1 JVM or Sun's 1.4
> JVM. Other than this issue there are no known platform/JVM
> incompatibilities.
>
> Please let me know immediately if you encounter any issues, as I'd like
> to make this upgrade as smooth as possible. Please make sure that you
> upgrade both your phoenix-bin directory and your build.xml. Thanks.
>
> --Peter
>
>
>
> --
> 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>
Phoenix 4.0.1
Posted by "Peter M. Goldstein" <pe...@yahoo.com>.
All,
I've just checked in the Phoenix 4.0.1 version. It resolves the logging
bug (all log entries go to a single file) that was introduced in the
Phoenix 4.0 release version.
I've been building and running with this version successfully on a
Windows 2k box for over a week now. Noel has tested it on Linux, and
found that it runs successfully there.
I have also changed the build.xml so that deprecation warnings are
turned off. With this upgrade the number of Component related
deprecation warnings goes up to 200+. IMHO that's just really annoying.
So I flipped them off until we do the upgrade to
Serviceable/ServiceManager in the next rev.
There is an observed issue with Red Hat Linux 6.2, Sun's 1.3.0 JVM, and
this revision of Phoenix. This has been confirmed to be a JVM issue,
and can be resolved by switching to either IBM's 1.3.1 JVM or Sun's 1.4
JVM. Other than this issue there are no known platform/JVM
incompatibilities.
Please let me know immediately if you encounter any issues, as I'd like
to make this upgrade as smooth as possible. Please make sure that you
upgrade both your phoenix-bin directory and your build.xml. Thanks.
--Peter
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
I have no other thoughts, all that can be decided as part of our proposal, if we decide to formulate one..
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> Sent: 30 October 2002 19:06
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
>
>
> Danny,
>
> Do you want to adopt the Cocoon project's proposal that the
> (initial) PMC be
> made from all Committers who want on, or do you have other thoughts?
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> --
> 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: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> I don't
> think there are any other jakarta (or XML) sub-projects that would make as
> good top-level projects as James.
With the exception possibly of Tomcat??
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Dave Richardson <da...@aifarms.com>.
>I would feel most confident about going ahead with this if we can get a
full turnout and no -1's
Well then!
+1
For what it's worth, I think James makes a good top-level project because
it's a server that's an application unto itself, like HTTPD. But I like
having all the java infrastructure and utility projects grouped together
under one roof. That way, you have a programmer's tool chest where all the
tools are easy to find, and the project can (ideally) show how the tools
work together and encourage development integration between them. I don't
think there are any other jakarta (or XML) sub-projects that would make as
good top-level projects as James.
(former lurker),
-dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Angus" <da...@apache.org>
To: "James Developers List" <ja...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 5:38 AM
Subject: RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Jason,
No not too late, I'll give this one a week, and possibly prod some of the
commiters who are innactive in James but active elsewhere in Jakarta.
A "yes" vote now, while not being a vote to actually submit a proposal, (we
should probably have a lazy vote on the proposal before we submit it)
represents the biggest shift in James PM since I-dont-know-when, its
adoption by java.apache or the inception of Jakarta probably.
We really don't want people to misunderstand our motives, or misconstrue our
opinions about Jakarta, and I would feel most confident about going ahead
with this if we can get a full turnout and no -1's
Even then there's no guarantee we'd be accepted.
d.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Webb [mailto:jw@inovem.com]
> Sent: 31 October 2002 09:39
> To: 'James Developers List'
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
>
>
> +1 (if I'm not too late)
>
> -- Jason
>
>
>
> --
> 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: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
Jason,
No not too late, I'll give this one a week, and possibly prod some of the commiters who are innactive in James but active elsewhere in Jakarta.
A "yes" vote now, while not being a vote to actually submit a proposal, (we should probably have a lazy vote on the proposal before we submit it) represents the biggest shift in James PM since I-dont-know-when, its adoption by java.apache or the inception of Jakarta probably.
We really don't want people to misunderstand our motives, or misconstrue our opinions about Jakarta, and I would feel most confident about going ahead with this if we can get a full turnout and no -1's
Even then there's no guarantee we'd be accepted.
d.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Webb [mailto:jw@inovem.com]
> Sent: 31 October 2002 09:39
> To: 'James Developers List'
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
>
>
> +1 (if I'm not too late)
>
> -- Jason
>
>
>
> --
> 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: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by Jason Webb <jw...@inovem.com>.
+1 (if I'm not too late)
-- Jason
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Danny,
Do you want to adopt the Cocoon project's proposal that the (initial) PMC be
made from all Committers who want on, or do you have other thoughts?
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
+1
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
Posted by "Peter M. Goldstein" <pe...@yahoo.com>.
+1.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Angus [mailto:danny@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:47 AM
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: [VOTE] James as an official Apache project
>
> All,
>
> Now that we've had a chance to digest whats meant by a top level
project,
> I'll subject you to my opinion, which I've held back so far.
>
> Basically I'm in favour of proposing james as an apache top level
project
> (tlp), I'm prepared to take the lead on our proposal, and here's why:
>
> James has a small yet mature community, we seldom seek recourse to
the
> jakarta PMC, and equally seldom are we scrutinised by them. We are not
the
> most active project, and I feel that this sometimes causes James to be
> disregarded. Likewise, apart from Avalon, we have few direct ties with
> other jakarta projects, and little in common apart from the
> language/platform and culture (but the culture is Apache)
>
> The tlp issue is more about management than web-site and mail
addresses, I
> don't believe that james.apache.org will bring many benefits, but I do
> think that normalising our managerial relationship with Jakarta by
> becoming a sibling rather than a child, and taking official control of
all
> the issues we currently inherit and "interpret" from Jakarta would
benefit
> James. The James PMC would be responsible to The Board.
>
> I do believe that Jakarta is becoming too big to function as a single
> project, that community and culture become diluted as you descend the
> heirarchy and that one solution is for mature projects leave the nest.
Of
> course other projects are free to make their own choices but as James
> consists primarily of the server which is an end-user product I feel
that
> top level project status, emphasisng its purpose rather then its
> technology, would suit it well.
>
> The proposals being discussed on reorg & community include the notion
of
> federated projects, James, with the approval of the Jakarta PMC, could
> continue to be associated with Jakarta, I would like to think that we
> wouldn't be leaving Jakarta, just growing up. I also know that James
would
> continue to rely on Jakarta for code, insight and cool thinking, but
we
> don't need to be a Jakarta sub-project for that.
>
> It would also give us the opportunity, as Serge mentioned, to better
> promote our sub-projects, theres Mailet, and mailets, and there are
the
> beginings of full blown mailet applications.
>
> So.. we've had time to examine the issues, lets vote..
>
> Should we prepare a proposal for submission to the board, that James
be
> elevated to a top level project?
>
> [ ] +1 I think it's a good idea
> [ ] +0 I'll accept the majority decision, stop bothering me
> [ ] -0 I have reservations
> [ ] -1, I don't think its a good idea
>
>
> d.
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-
> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-
> help@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>