You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu> on 2003/11/08 00:09:26 UTC
[all] Separate email list for math development?
I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
OUT THERE... ;)
If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
-Mark
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
"splitting" here means "splitting the mailing lists" I had not read
robert's proposal before posting this.
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
> -0 on splitting commons-math. I don't mind the traffic, and would expect
> it to be cyclical anyway. (E.g., Jelly was once a very big part of
> commons dev traffic, but isn't anymore. primitives has been the source of
> lot of traffic recently, and may be off and on for the next few weeks, but
> I wouldn't expect that to continue.) I'd think math either reaches a
> certain level of maturity/stability, and hence generates less traffic, or
> grows to a point where it no longer belongs in commons at all.
>
> -1 on splitting off hivemind by the way. It's not even a commons-proper
> component yet, so if it's not something of interest to the general
> commons-dev list, it should move to tapestry-sandbox or sourceforge or
> something. A sandbox only component should not have it's own list.
> Where's the oversight? Where's the community?
>
> -1 on splitting off jelly, unless its to move jelly out of commons
> entirely. Jelly accounts for very little traffic these days.
>
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>
> > I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
> > in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
> > another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
> > about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
> > OUT THERE... ;)
> >
> > If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
> > possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
> > theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
> >
> > -Mark
> >
> >
>
>
--
- Rod <http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
-0 on splitting commons-math. I don't mind the traffic, and would expect
it to be cyclical anyway. (E.g., Jelly was once a very big part of
commons dev traffic, but isn't anymore. primitives has been the source of
lot of traffic recently, and may be off and on for the next few weeks, but
I wouldn't expect that to continue.) I'd think math either reaches a
certain level of maturity/stability, and hence generates less traffic, or
grows to a point where it no longer belongs in commons at all.
-1 on splitting off hivemind by the way. It's not even a commons-proper
component yet, so if it's not something of interest to the general
commons-dev list, it should move to tapestry-sandbox or sourceforge or
something. A sandbox only component should not have it's own list.
Where's the oversight? Where's the community?
-1 on splitting off jelly, unless its to move jelly out of commons
entirely. Jelly accounts for very little traffic these days.
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
> OUT THERE... ;)
>
> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>
> -Mark
>
>
--
- Rod <http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by __matthewHawthorne <ma...@phreaker.net>.
I've done some reading on the apache site, but I still don't quite
understand where apache commons fits in.
What is the criteria for placing projects in jakarta (top-level) vs.
jakarta commons vs. apache commons?
J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Tim O'Brien wrote:
>
>>> so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>> common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>> becomes managed by apache commons.
>>>
>>
>>
>> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
>> Apache Commons.
>
>
> As long as [math] focuses on Java, I don't see what this will
> buy.
> If it's simply the commons list becoming too crowded, decide
> where [math] should go:
> 1. A companion to [lang], [logging] and [cli], valuing "small"
> over completeness and focusing on common tasks -> stay at
> jakarta-commons
> 2. Grow into a full fledged library or even a system of apps
> related to numerical calculations -> become a stand-alone
> Jakarta subproject, or even go top-level.
>
> J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "J.Pietschmann" <j3...@yahoo.de>.
Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> ... There is significant number of us with an interest in seeing
> numerically sound implementations of various aspects of mathematics
> in java... Suffice it to say that java
> implementations do provide an elegant means to explore ideal Design
> Patterns for Mathematical packages and provide a foundation for
> exploring how to "bridge" java with other languages that may be more
> optimized to handle such computations. These are noble goals.
Agreed. I can see the development of higher level APIs as a major
goal for [math].
Interestingly, there are quite a few directions to pursue.
One major direction is floating point number crunching, in
particular
- engineering and physics support, including large equation
systems, ODE, PDE, numerical integration, continuus
optimization, large eigenvalue problems, integral equations
- computer geometry support, mainly CSG
- computer graphics
The other rough direction is discrete math:
- number theory
- graph theory (we've got [graph])
- planning and discrete optimization
- encryption
The "application" branch, somewhat randomly choosen keywords
- CAS
- data visualization, including curve fitting, descriptive statistics,
adaptive filtering and isosurface detection
- neural networks and machine learning in general
- diagram layout, general graph layout
- 3D modelling and rendering
- ERP
- network simulation
Well, the utility of [math] for real world heavy number crunching (the
very first point above) will always be limited. Other directions seems
to be more interesting in terms of getting people using it in real
world applications.
J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
I do agree with much of what you say, but (2) There is significant
number of us with an interest in seeing numerically sound
implementations of various aspects of mathematics in java (no matter how
wonderfully fast F77 implementations may be, Fortran will never be Java,
nor would one want it to be). I could retort many reasons why this is an
interest to myself and others in the group. Suffice it to say that java
implementations do provide an elegant means to explore ideal Design
Patterns for Mathematical packages and provide a foundation for
exploring how to "bridge" java with other languages that may be more
optimized to handle such computations. These are noble goals.
-Mark
Matt Cliff wrote:
> my 2cents
>
> (1) I think it would be best to get a 1.0 release of commons-math as a
> jakarta-commons subproject before any movement (the good-old KISS acronym
> comes to mind)
>
> (2) I am not sure to what extent math may get developed, as was stated
> in a different thread previously Java is not the best platform for
> Numerical Analysis. That being said, I dont forsee commons-math as a
> serious Numerical Anaylsis lib, rather a convenient and useful tool to
> explore 'simple' problems. This could be significant in research, in my
> opinion you dont really need to 'crank' up the system in most cases, and
> have a handy library that can get some nice results quickly in a Java
> setting is very valueable. There are plenty of high-scale number
> crunchers, and most of the best performing ones will always be in F77 due
> to its static nature. It may very well be that some of the value out of
> the math project is as an SPI to these backend 'crunchers' which provides
> a nice Java interface to interact with the rest of the world. (leading me
> back to the beginning of this rambling...)
>
> (3) I am thoroughly confused as to the pros-cons of what moving this
> the apache-commons level would do. I like the idea of a 100% java
> framework at this point (leading me back to point #1).
>
>
> In summary, I think it should stay where it is for now.
>
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by Matt Cliff <ma...@mattcliff.com>.
my 2cents
(1) I think it would be best to get a 1.0 release of commons-math as a
jakarta-commons subproject before any movement (the good-old KISS acronym
comes to mind)
(2) I am not sure to what extent math may get developed, as was stated
in a different thread previously Java is not the best platform for
Numerical Analysis. That being said, I dont forsee commons-math as a
serious Numerical Anaylsis lib, rather a convenient and useful tool to
explore 'simple' problems. This could be significant in research, in my
opinion you dont really need to 'crank' up the system in most cases, and
have a handy library that can get some nice results quickly in a Java
setting is very valueable. There are plenty of high-scale number
crunchers, and most of the best performing ones will always be in F77 due
to its static nature. It may very well be that some of the value out of
the math project is as an SPI to these backend 'crunchers' which provides
a nice Java interface to interact with the rest of the world. (leading me
back to the beginning of this rambling...)
(3) I am thoroughly confused as to the pros-cons of what moving this
the apache-commons level would do. I like the idea of a 100% java
framework at this point (leading me back to point #1).
In summary, I think it should stay where it is for now.
--
Matt Cliff
Cliff Consulting
303.757.4912
720.280.6324 (c)
The label said install Windows 98 or better so I installed Linux.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>
>
>>Most Commons projects have arisen from either top level apache projects,
>>xml apache projects or jakarta apache projects. As such they are
>
>
> You'd be surprised that this isn't as common as you think :) Many came out
> of a junky 'util' project. Struts have been good about factoring out some
> internal bits, but to a large extent I think the Struts ones are the only
> ones that have succeeded as spawned projects. Many of the other spawned
> projects didn't make it out of the sandbox.
>
hmm, I see
>
>>I think a great deal of thought has to go into why this sort of
>>perceived bifurcation is occurring between Apache Commons and Jakarta
>>Commons. Is there a problem here? Are groups disagreeing with one
>>anothers written mandates? Or perceived mandates? Do people just not
>>like working together? Maybe Jakarta needs to issue a more "uptodate"
>>position on its content? There certainly are allot of non-server
>
>
> It's confusing. I don't think anyone knows yet what the deal will be with
> A-C and J-C. There's no board-push to move J-C to A-C, and A-C is really
> just waiting for things to turn up so far.
>
Yes, this is what I'm concerned about.
>
>>oriented tools in it, (CLI, Jelly, BCEL, BSF, Gump, Log4j, ORO, Regexp,
>>JMeter . . .) and there really isn't anything that suggest Jakarta or
>>the Jakarta Commons are only for Server related packages. What I do see
>>are different groups of programmers forming separate schools or "clicks".
>
>
> [cliques] :)
>
Yes Mrs. Smith, my Spell checker ate my English homework...
> Do you mean language based? Java vs C vs Python vs Perl? Or internal
> Jakarta based? Tomcat vs Turbine vs Avalon?
>
It seems there is a general movement in ASF to propagate some of the
concepts and designs associated with Jakarta and XML projects out to all
ASF projects as a whole, unfortunately this is translating into a number
of different initiatives that appear to be stepping on each others toes.
Apache Incubator vs. Apache Jakarta vs Apache Commons vs Apache XML vs
Apache Avalon vs Apache DB
> This might be a big difference in the httpd/Jakarta world. Jakarta treats
> 'server' quite liberally while httpd has until recently seemed to focus
> only on port 80/443 server stuff.
>
>
>>IMHO, the focus now should be on a release of our current efforts in
>>Jakarta Commons, this will provide a point of reference which we can
>>grow off of and others can experiment with. It will also get us onto a
>>more solid release schedule.
>
>
> This was going to be my question when I started replying. Should Math
> focus on a tight release of what they currently have under the J-C
> sunshade [as people seem scared of the word umbrella] and then start
> trying to figure out what thoughts there are for weird and whacky ideas.
>
> Seems to be what you're saying, so +1.
>
yes
>
>>We should also consider that we may be working other open source
>>codebases and projects into the Apache project in the future. We should
>>expect we are going to eventually need more room to work on such
>>integration and experimentation outside the scope of what we will want
>>to make modular and available via the Jakarta Commons. I'm convinced I'd
>>like to see a "parent project" for the Jakarta Commons Math API, I'm not
>>convinced yet that it should be outside Jakarta. I think initially, as
>>least, any parent project of math is going to be very Java centric, we
>>should take things one step at a time and make changes as they are needed.
>
>
> I think there will be some diplomacy etc to figure out just where a
> Jakarta Math or Apache Math or Mapache would live. Once the Math release
> in Commons is made, write a couple of scope documents. One for inside
> Jakarta and one as a TLP for Apache. See which feels the most comfortable.
>
> Hen
Sounds like a good way to move forward.
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> Most Commons projects have arisen from either top level apache projects,
> xml apache projects or jakarta apache projects. As such they are
You'd be surprised that this isn't as common as you think :) Many came out
of a junky 'util' project. Struts have been good about factoring out some
internal bits, but to a large extent I think the Struts ones are the only
ones that have succeeded as spawned projects. Many of the other spawned
projects didn't make it out of the sandbox.
> I think a great deal of thought has to go into why this sort of
> perceived bifurcation is occurring between Apache Commons and Jakarta
> Commons. Is there a problem here? Are groups disagreeing with one
> anothers written mandates? Or perceived mandates? Do people just not
> like working together? Maybe Jakarta needs to issue a more "uptodate"
> position on its content? There certainly are allot of non-server
It's confusing. I don't think anyone knows yet what the deal will be with
A-C and J-C. There's no board-push to move J-C to A-C, and A-C is really
just waiting for things to turn up so far.
> oriented tools in it, (CLI, Jelly, BCEL, BSF, Gump, Log4j, ORO, Regexp,
> JMeter . . .) and there really isn't anything that suggest Jakarta or
> the Jakarta Commons are only for Server related packages. What I do see
> are different groups of programmers forming separate schools or "clicks".
[cliques] :)
Do you mean language based? Java vs C vs Python vs Perl? Or internal
Jakarta based? Tomcat vs Turbine vs Avalon?
This might be a big difference in the httpd/Jakarta world. Jakarta treats
'server' quite liberally while httpd has until recently seemed to focus
only on port 80/443 server stuff.
> IMHO, the focus now should be on a release of our current efforts in
> Jakarta Commons, this will provide a point of reference which we can
> grow off of and others can experiment with. It will also get us onto a
> more solid release schedule.
This was going to be my question when I started replying. Should Math
focus on a tight release of what they currently have under the J-C
sunshade [as people seem scared of the word umbrella] and then start
trying to figure out what thoughts there are for weird and whacky ideas.
Seems to be what you're saying, so +1.
> We should also consider that we may be working other open source
> codebases and projects into the Apache project in the future. We should
> expect we are going to eventually need more room to work on such
> integration and experimentation outside the scope of what we will want
> to make modular and available via the Jakarta Commons. I'm convinced I'd
> like to see a "parent project" for the Jakarta Commons Math API, I'm not
> convinced yet that it should be outside Jakarta. I think initially, as
> least, any parent project of math is going to be very Java centric, we
> should take things one step at a time and make changes as they are needed.
I think there will be some diplomacy etc to figure out just where a
Jakarta Math or Apache Math or Mapache would live. Once the Math release
in Commons is made, write a couple of scope documents. One for inside
Jakarta and one as a TLP for Apache. See which feels the most comfortable.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Tim O'Brien wrote:
>
>>> so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>> common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>> becomes managed by apache commons.
>>>
>>
>>
>> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
>> Apache Commons.
>
>
> As long as [math] focuses on Java, I don't see what this will
> buy.
> If it's simply the commons list becoming too crowded, decide
> where [math] should go:
> 1. A companion to [lang], [logging] and [cli], valuing "small"
> over completeness and focusing on common tasks -> stay at
> jakarta-commons
> 2. Grow into a full fledged library or even a system of apps
> related to numerical calculations -> become a stand-alone
> Jakarta subproject, or even go top-level.
>
> J.Pietschmann
I suppose I should clarify my opinion on this. Sorry if this is long
winded and somewhat confusing. Also, it is just opinion...
Most Commons projects have arisen from either top level apache projects,
xml apache projects or jakarta apache projects. As such they are
basically refactorings of codebases within those projects. As such, they
provide a "unique subset of functionality" from those projects
refactored and made available to the community as a whole via the
Jakarta Commons. This is a very powerful mechanism and one which the
Jakarta Commons is highly tailored for.
To stick my neck out there: While some projects within the Jakarta
Commons are uniquely evolved out the sandbox, it is clear that
ultimately the best refactorings tend to arise after some considerable
mucking about in larger projects with "pre-existing applications" of
those code bases as "working proofs of concept".
Interestingly, this mucking about tends to be a bit more revolutionary
when one is an independent project with room to both evolve and reinvent
its codebase. This, in my opinion is what the math project is lacking by
being only within the commons, some wonderful inventions could arise if
theres more room to experiment and redesign, if theres room for Math
"subprojects" and experimental endeavors such as Interpreter Frameworks,
GUI Tools, MathML/OpenMath experimental implementations, usage byte code
optimization tools...
These are all things, which in my mind, don't have the space to grow as
a simple jakarta commons library, but are vehicles for which a simple
jakarta commons library would take its best shape through the
experimentation with. So what I suggest is that Jakarta Commons Math
would benefit from having a parent project where there are applications
to offer strong "working proofs of concept" of its usage.
Since Jakarta in and of itself has considerable focus on "Server Side
Java" and specifically, tools that work well in its flagship Tomcat
platform, there is concern as to if Jakarta is the right place for a
project which may include adventures into Swing GUI's bridges with other
programming languages and mathematical platforms, etc. I might suggest
that there is really a very artificial and illusionary boundary between
the concept of application and server. Is a Tomcat instance installed on
my desktop a "server platform" or an "application platform". Really, all
I know is its a damn good platform for doing just about anything to do
with java on!
I think a great deal of thought has to go into why this sort of
perceived bifurcation is occurring between Apache Commons and Jakarta
Commons. Is there a problem here? Are groups disagreeing with one
anothers written mandates? Or perceived mandates? Do people just not
like working together? Maybe Jakarta needs to issue a more "uptodate"
position on its content? There certainly are allot of non-server
oriented tools in it, (CLI, Jelly, BCEL, BSF, Gump, Log4j, ORO, Regexp,
JMeter . . .) and there really isn't anything that suggest Jakarta or
the Jakarta Commons are only for Server related packages. What I do see
are different groups of programmers forming separate schools or "clicks".
IMHO, the focus now should be on a release of our current efforts in
Jakarta Commons, this will provide a point of reference which we can
grow off of and others can experiment with. It will also get us onto a
more solid release schedule.
We should also consider that we may be working other open source
codebases and projects into the Apache project in the future. We should
expect we are going to eventually need more room to work on such
integration and experimentation outside the scope of what we will want
to make modular and available via the Jakarta Commons. I'm convinced I'd
like to see a "parent project" for the Jakarta Commons Math API, I'm not
convinced yet that it should be outside Jakarta. I think initially, as
least, any parent project of math is going to be very Java centric, we
should take things one step at a time and make changes as they are needed.
Getting off my soapbox now (time for dinner),
Mark
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> a move to apache commons would allow this progression to happen much
> more easily. the rules which apply here in the jakarta-commons about
> components and distributions would make things difficult.
What does this mean? What rules "about components and distributions" does
this refer to?
> within a math
> group in the apache commons, different products could be developed by
> the same group of contributors with greater freedom. it would also
> allow gui visualization components to be developed (which we cannot
> allow here at jakarta).
>
> - robert
>
--
- Rod <http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 12 Nov 2003, at 12:30, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 06:51 PM, robert burrell donkin
> wrote:
>> On 11 Nov 2003, at 12:47, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
<snip>
>>> 2) I have a feeling that no one would utter a peep if someone did
>>> some GUI extensions to a project here at Jakarta. We've always been
>>> willing to stretch the meaning of our charter (hence POI), and if it
>>> really came to be a problem, I think we would try to work it out.
>>
>> there seem to be a lot of senior apache members who don't agree with
>> that. i'd rather act to try to start sorting things out before whilst
>> the jakarta community still has a say.
>
> You're notion of sorting it out seems to be "remove from Jakarta
> community". That may be what the people involved want to do, which is
> fine by me, but if they want to stay, it behooves us on the PMC to try
> and see what we can do to help them out.
i'd be happy if someone wanted to approach the board requesting a
change to the charter but whilst the charter existing in it's current
form, i think we need to abide by it.
IMO if math wants to stay here in the jakarta-commons and be managed by
the jakarta pmc then the community needs to understand the limitations.
i haven't been as involved with math as i'd have liked to have been (or
as much as i'd intended when i planted the seed) but seems to have come
through some difficult times to emerge as a very healthy community.
i've tried to outline the future issues that i think are approaching
for the community and offered a solution. i think that a move to apache
commons would be a very positive step for math.
in general terms, (i might be wrong but) the impression created on the
community list was that the decision had already been taken at the ASF
level a long time ago to sort out jakarta by reducing it's management
responsibilities. the jakarta pmc has taken a *lot* of flak about it's
failure to persuade more sub-projects to move.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 06:51 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> On 11 Nov 2003, at 12:47, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>>
>> On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 05:41 PM, robert burrell donkin
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> a move to apache commons would allow this progression to happen much
>>> more easily.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>>> the rules which apply here in the jakarta-commons about components
>>> and distributions would make things difficult. within a math group
>>> in the apache commons, different products could be developed by the
>>> same group of contributors with greater freedom. it would also allow
>>> gui visualization components to be developed (which we cannot allow
>>> here at jakarta).
>>>
>>
>> I just can't understand what you mean. To be clear :
>>
>> 0) What rules make things difficult?
>
> the jakarta project has a given scope granted by the board. until
> recently i though that i could give a rational justification that the
> projects we have here are at jakarta in scope (given a wide enough
> interpretation). IMHO we're now starting to forget the original
> charter.
Starting??? :) Please, we've been stretching the charter for *years*.
>
>> 1) In Jakarta-Commons, the developers have the freedom to develop
>> what they want, when they want to in their projects. Additionally,
>> developers can go off to the sandbox and do whatever they want, and
>> when they feel that they have something solid, as to bring it to the
>> commons community. Did math have any trouble starting, defining
>> their project, or implementing things they way they wanted?
>
> there were some troubles but the limited current scope of math is
> fine. there are developments which are IMO definitely out of jakarta
> scope. there are also a number of jakarta-commons specific rules that
> would need to be bent to allow commons-maths to move in some
> directions that the community might want to take it.
>
>> 2) I have a feeling that no one would utter a peep if someone did
>> some GUI extensions to a project here at Jakarta. We've always been
>> willing to stretch the meaning of our charter (hence POI), and if it
>> really came to be a problem, I think we would try to work it out.
>
> there seem to be a lot of senior apache members who don't agree with
> that. i'd rather act to try to start sorting things out before whilst
> the jakarta community still has a say.
You're notion of sorting it out seems to be "remove from Jakarta
community". That may be what the people involved want to do, which is
fine by me, but if they want to stay, it behooves us on the PMC to try
and see what we can do to help them out.
geir
>
> - robert
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geirm@optonline.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 11 Nov 2003, at 12:47, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 05:41 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>>
>> a move to apache commons would allow this progression to happen much
>> more easily.
>
> Why?
>
>> the rules which apply here in the jakarta-commons about components
>> and distributions would make things difficult. within a math group in
>> the apache commons, different products could be developed by the same
>> group of contributors with greater freedom. it would also allow gui
>> visualization components to be developed (which we cannot allow here
>> at jakarta).
>>
>
> I just can't understand what you mean. To be clear :
>
> 0) What rules make things difficult?
the jakarta project has a given scope granted by the board. until
recently i though that i could give a rational justification that the
projects we have here are at jakarta in scope (given a wide enough
interpretation). IMHO we're now starting to forget the original
charter.
> 1) In Jakarta-Commons, the developers have the freedom to develop
> what they want, when they want to in their projects. Additionally,
> developers can go off to the sandbox and do whatever they want, and
> when they feel that they have something solid, as to bring it to the
> commons community. Did math have any trouble starting, defining their
> project, or implementing things they way they wanted?
there were some troubles but the limited current scope of math is fine.
there are developments which are IMO definitely out of jakarta scope.
there are also a number of jakarta-commons specific rules that would
need to be bent to allow commons-maths to move in some directions that
the community might want to take it.
> 2) I have a feeling that no one would utter a peep if someone did some
> GUI extensions to a project here at Jakarta. We've always been
> willing to stretch the meaning of our charter (hence POI), and if it
> really came to be a problem, I think we would try to work it out.
there seem to be a lot of senior apache members who don't agree with
that. i'd rather act to try to start sorting things out before whilst
the jakarta community still has a say.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 05:41 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> a move to apache commons would allow this progression to happen much
> more easily.
Why?
> the rules which apply here in the jakarta-commons about components
> and distributions would make things difficult. within a math group in
> the apache commons, different products could be developed by the same
> group of contributors with greater freedom. it would also allow gui
> visualization components to be developed (which we cannot allow here
> at jakarta).
>
I just can't understand what you mean. To be clear :
0) What rules make things difficult?
1) In Jakarta-Commons, the developers have the freedom to develop what
they want, when they want to in their projects. Additionally,
developers can go off to the sandbox and do whatever they want, and
when they feel that they have something solid, as to bring it to the
commons community. Did math have any trouble starting, defining their
project, or implementing things they way they wanted?
2) I have a feeling that no one would utter a peep if someone did some
GUI extensions to a project here at Jakarta. We've always been willing
to stretch the meaning of our charter (hence POI), and if it really
came to be a problem, I think we would try to work it out.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geirm@optonline.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 10 Nov 2003, at 20:52, J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Tim O'Brien wrote:
>>> so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>> common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>> becomes managed by apache commons.
>>>
>> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
>> Apache Commons.
>
> As long as [math] focuses on Java, I don't see what this will
> buy.
> If it's simply the commons list becoming too crowded, decide
> where [math] should go:
> 1. A companion to [lang], [logging] and [cli], valuing "small"
> over completeness and focusing on common tasks -> stay at
> jakarta-commons
> 2. Grow into a full fledged library or even a system of apps
> related to numerical calculations -> become a stand-alone
> Jakarta subproject, or even go top-level.
though you might be right in the long run, i don't think that such a
choice is necessary just yet. i think that separate distributions are
probably the way forward.
there seems (now i've finally managed to catch up on the email ;) a lot
of momentum developing for more comprehensive libraries. on the other
hand, i really think that there's great merit in the original
conception of small, limited, business focussed libraries. i think that
in the long run, we might see distributions of both small, tight
libraries and larger more general collections.
a move to apache commons would allow this progression to happen much
more easily. the rules which apply here in the jakarta-commons about
components and distributions would make things difficult. within a math
group in the apache commons, different products could be developed by
the same group of contributors with greater freedom. it would also
allow gui visualization components to be developed (which we cannot
allow here at jakarta).
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "J.Pietschmann" <j3...@yahoo.de>.
Tim O'Brien wrote:
>>so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>becomes managed by apache commons.
>>
>
>
> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
> Apache Commons.
As long as [math] focuses on Java, I don't see what this will
buy.
If it's simply the commons list becoming too crowded, decide
where [math] should go:
1. A companion to [lang], [logging] and [cli], valuing "small"
over completeness and focusing on common tasks -> stay at
jakarta-commons
2. Grow into a full fledged library or even a system of apps
related to numerical calculations -> become a stand-alone
Jakarta subproject, or even go top-level.
J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> commons-maths will still be part of jakarta-commons :)
>
> it'll only be managed by the apache-commons pmc.
Which will make it in no way a "part" of jakarta-commons. "Related to" or
"linked from" perhaps, but not strictly "a part of" in any meaningful way.
>
> best of both worlds :)
>
> - robert
- Rod <http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 11 Nov 2003, at 12:38, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On Sunday, November 9, 2003, at 10:52 PM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>
>> Regarding separate DEV list -- as I said in my earlier comments,
>> that's totally
>> up to the MATH developers if they want it or not. The fact that it
>> might make
>> my life easier certainly isn't binding. Note also that the
>> httpclient guys
>> were not pushed out; they deliberately chose to have a separate DEV
>> list.
>> That's the way it should work -- being up to the developers involved.
>
> +1
IIRC though httpclient voted to leave, the rest of us applied a *lot*
of pressure. i don't think that they would have left without that kind
of arm-twisting.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On Sunday, November 9, 2003, at 10:52 PM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> Regarding separate DEV list -- as I said in my earlier comments,
> that's totally
> up to the MATH developers if they want it or not. The fact that it
> might make
> my life easier certainly isn't binding. Note also that the httpclient
> guys
> were not pushed out; they deliberately chose to have a separate DEV
> list.
> That's the way it should work -- being up to the developers involved.
+1
>
>> Hen
>>
>
> Craig
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geirm@optonline.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Craig R. McClanahan" <cr...@apache.org>.
Quoting Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>:
>
>
> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> > On 9 Nov 2003, at 22:07, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> >
> > > 1.) Plausible, I understand though that Apache Commons is under
> > > subversion, will this be a challenge to migrate to?
> >
> > subversion is (by all accounts) very, very cool. everyone here at
> > apache will be using it sooner or later. those nice people over at
> > apache commons will allow commons-maths to use cvs initially (if that's
> > what's needed) but it'd probably be worthing thinking about making the
> > jump straight away.
>
> You'll also have active support from those in favour of Subversion [coders
> of which are at Apache] so I'd expect this to move smoothly.
>
> > > 2.) How will we relate to Jakarta Commons? certainly we may have
> > > dependencies on parts of the commons, but doesn't this leave little
> > > room for jakarta commons components to utilize math as a dependency as
> > > they are generally expected to be dependent on only other jakarta
> > > commons projects.
> >
> > commons-maths will still be part of jakarta-commons :)
> >
> > it'll only be managed by the apache-commons pmc.
>
> I'm with Rod here. It won't be a part of jakarta-commons, though it should
> still be some kind of link on the Jakarta site. Jakarta Commons ought to
> have a vote to add dependency on Apache Commons Java projects as an
> acceptable concpet.
>
> This does raise a question in the PMC-setup for the ASF. If a project is
> meant to be a part of Jakarta and another project, ie) Commons, must there
> be a 1 to 1 mapping on the PMCs.
>
>From a governance viewpoint, the correct way to state the actual assertion is
that "all Apache codebases must have a PMC responsible for them." The
technical location of the code and corresponding mailing lists doesn't
particularly matter -- but that's true SOLELY from this viewpoint.
>From a practical standpoint, people will look at the name of the CVS repository
(jakarta-commons), the name of the mailing list
(commons-dev@JAKARTA.apache.org), and make the natural inference that it's a
Jakarta PMC managed codebase. If it's actually being managed by the Apache
Commons project, that would be creating needless confusion -- if that's where
people want it to be managed, then the code and mailing list should also be
those associated with the Apache Commons project. If it's going to stay part
of Jakarta commons, then having the code and mailing list here is fine.
Regarding separate DEV list -- as I said in my earlier comments, that's totally
up to the MATH developers if they want it or not. The fact that it might make
my life easier certainly isn't binding. Note also that the httpclient guys
were not pushed out; they deliberately chose to have a separate DEV list.
That's the way it should work -- being up to the developers involved.
> Hen
>
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>>>2.) How will we relate to Jakarta Commons? certainly we may have
>>>dependencies on parts of the commons, but doesn't this leave little
>>>room for jakarta commons components to utilize math as a dependency as
>>>they are generally expected to be dependent on only other jakarta
>>>commons projects.
>>
>>commons-maths will still be part of jakarta-commons :)
>>
>>it'll only be managed by the apache-commons pmc.
>
>
> I'm with Rod here. It won't be a part of jakarta-commons, though it should
> still be some kind of link on the Jakarta site. Jakarta Commons ought to
> have a vote to add dependency on Apache Commons Java projects as an
> acceptable concpet.
>
> This does raise a question in the PMC-setup for the ASF. If a project is
> meant to be a part of Jakarta and another project, ie) Commons, must there
> be a 1 to 1 mapping on the PMCs.
>
> Hen
>
Another issue to consider between the two groups is the java package
namespace:
org.apache.commons...
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 9 Nov 2003, at 22:07, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>
> > 1.) Plausible, I understand though that Apache Commons is under
> > subversion, will this be a challenge to migrate to?
>
> subversion is (by all accounts) very, very cool. everyone here at
> apache will be using it sooner or later. those nice people over at
> apache commons will allow commons-maths to use cvs initially (if that's
> what's needed) but it'd probably be worthing thinking about making the
> jump straight away.
You'll also have active support from those in favour of Subversion [coders
of which are at Apache] so I'd expect this to move smoothly.
> > 2.) How will we relate to Jakarta Commons? certainly we may have
> > dependencies on parts of the commons, but doesn't this leave little
> > room for jakarta commons components to utilize math as a dependency as
> > they are generally expected to be dependent on only other jakarta
> > commons projects.
>
> commons-maths will still be part of jakarta-commons :)
>
> it'll only be managed by the apache-commons pmc.
I'm with Rod here. It won't be a part of jakarta-commons, though it should
still be some kind of link on the Jakarta site. Jakarta Commons ought to
have a vote to add dependency on Apache Commons Java projects as an
acceptable concpet.
This does raise a question in the PMC-setup for the ASF. If a project is
meant to be a part of Jakarta and another project, ie) Commons, must there
be a 1 to 1 mapping on the PMCs.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On Sunday, November 9, 2003, at 05:35 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 9 Nov 2003, at 22:07, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>>
>> 2.) How will we relate to Jakarta Commons? certainly we may have
>> dependencies on parts of the commons, but doesn't this leave little
>> room for jakarta commons components to utilize math as a dependency
>> as they are generally expected to be dependent on only other jakarta
>> commons projects.
>
> commons-maths will still be part of jakarta-commons :)
>
> it'll only be managed by the apache-commons pmc.
>
Hang on there a sec. I must have missed something somewhere. You can't
have a jakarta-commons project that's managed by the apache-commons PMC
and in the apache-commons repository. By definition, such a project is
part of apache-commons, not jakarta-commons.
If a component wants to move, move. But lets be honest on what's
happening.
If the expectation of intra-j-c dependencies is just that, an
expectation, then I see no reason why there couldn't be dependencies on
an a-c component from j-c.
geir
> best of both worlds :)
>
> - robert
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geirm@optonline.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 9 Nov 2003, at 22:07, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> Darn it, I just got done making all those little edits to hrefs and
> the bugzilla! ;-)
not a problem. they'll do just fine as they are :)
there's not reason why users should be bothered by the change (see
below).
> 1.) Plausible, I understand though that Apache Commons is under
> subversion, will this be a challenge to migrate to?
subversion is (by all accounts) very, very cool. everyone here at
apache will be using it sooner or later. those nice people over at
apache commons will allow commons-maths to use cvs initially (if that's
what's needed) but it'd probably be worthing thinking about making the
jump straight away.
> 2.) How will we relate to Jakarta Commons? certainly we may have
> dependencies on parts of the commons, but doesn't this leave little
> room for jakarta commons components to utilize math as a dependency as
> they are generally expected to be dependent on only other jakarta
> commons projects.
commons-maths will still be part of jakarta-commons :)
it'll only be managed by the apache-commons pmc.
best of both worlds :)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
Darn it, I just got done making all those little edits to hrefs and the
bugzilla! ;-)
1.) Plausible, I understand though that Apache Commons is under
subversion, will this be a challenge to migrate to?
2.) How will we relate to Jakarta Commons? certainly we may have
dependencies on parts of the commons, but doesn't this leave little room
for jakarta commons components to utilize math as a dependency as they
are generally expected to be dependent on only other jakarta commons
projects.
-Mark
Tim O'Brien wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 14:24, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> <snip/>
>
>>so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>becomes managed by apache commons.
>>
>
>
> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
> Apache Commons.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for
math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
I'm more convinced now. I think we should consider that Math will also
evolve to become more modular, possibly with subprojects of its own.
Perhaps, if there is a policy on the dependency and usage between
Jakarta Commons and Apache Commons, it would be logical to place math in
Apache Commons.
+1
Tim O'Brien wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 14:24, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> <snip/>
>
>>so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>becomes managed by apache commons.
>>
>
>
> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
> Apache Commons.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 11 Nov 2003, at 11:31, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On Sunday, November 9, 2003, at 05:39 PM, Tim O'Brien wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 14:24, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> <snip/>
>>> so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>>> common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>>> becomes managed by apache commons.
>>>
>>
>> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
>> Apache Commons.
>
> What does 'affiliated' mean?
i can't recall just now who coined it but here's what i meant by the
term.
most users interactive with jakarta through the website and newsletter.
for them, a product is part of jakarta if it's listed in the products
section of the jakarta side bar (and - to a lesser extent - is
categorized under jakarta in the newsletter). issues of management
shouldn't really need to concern a user too much.
if they can click on a link to the product's home page from the jakarta
sidebar and join the product's mailing list from the jakarta mailing
list page then the product is part of jakarta (as least as far as they
are concerned). of course, if a product is managed by another pmc, then
the product website will be hosted under a separate virtual host and
linked from the main project website. similarly the mailing list will
not be @jakarta. but from a user's perspective, the product will still
be part of jakarta.
affiliation was the term coined to express this kind of relationship.
of course, this only applies if product move to top level projects
which offer multiple products. it seems to me that this is the only
(positive) way that jakarta can be reduced in size until it again
become manageable (but maybe this is a matter for the members...)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On Sunday, November 9, 2003, at 05:39 PM, Tim O'Brien wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 14:24, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> <snip/>
>> so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
>> common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
>> becomes managed by apache commons.
>>
>
> +1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
> Apache Commons.
What does 'affiliated' mean?
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geirm@optonline.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
math to apache commons was Re: [all] Separate email list for math
development?
Posted by Tim O'Brien <to...@discursive.com>.
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 14:24, robert burrell donkin wrote:
<snip/>
> so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
> common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
> becomes managed by apache commons.
>
+1, I think that now is the right time to move commons math to
Apache Commons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
congratulations to all math contributors concerning the recent
promotion and my apologies for not really being as active a i would
have liked to be on math.
i'd like to give a friendly -1 to a separate list for math and outline
an alternative solution.
why? because experience has proved that separate lists don't work.
forcing httpclient onto a separate list was a *major* mistake which i
don't want to see repeated. why? because they are now a separate,
isolated community. not only does this reduce the integration and flow
of ideas but it also causes (me at least) major worries about
supervision.
so - is there a positive alternative? i'd like to propose that
common-maths continues to be affiliated with jakarta-commons but
becomes managed by apache commons.
what this means in practical terms is that commons-maths will be linked
from the jakarta-commons sidebar and can retain the same user mailing
list (if that's what the community wants). the committers will still be
part of jakarta (so that they can edit the web site) but would also be
part of apache-commons. commons-math will be supervised by the
apache-commons project management committee and be hosted under their
version control repositories, under their virtual host and with a
@commons.apache.org development mailing list address.
this arrangement will give all the advantages of jakarta-commons but
will give the community much greater freedom than the jakarta pmc can
allow. for example, you'll be able to pursue gui integration and find
it easier to refactor into different deliverables. you'll also have a
network of much more senior and knowledgeable apache folks available to
help out with the thorny issues of licensing (which will inevitably
crop up from time to time). the community will also be in at the start
of very exciting developments with all the advantages that brings.
i really think that this move would benefit the commons-maths
community. i've always thought that the apache commons would be the
right place for commons-maths to end up, right from when i first
started the component. i think that now is the right time to make the
move.
i'm willing to actively work to ensure that this move is successful.
does anyone have anything they want to discuss before i start to set
things in motion?
- robert
On 8 Nov 2003, at 00:17, Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> I think at some point in the future, we're going to see both "Generic
> API's" and separate projects that are not necessarily Jakarta Commons
> fodder arise out of [math]. I'd like to consider an eventual future
> where these projects may need to have a more "top level" home such as
> Commons or Jakarta. Right now we're very java oriented though, I
> personally feel very emboldened with the process of the commons and
> savor its existing community (thats right, I said "savor"). Its
> processes are having a very positive effect on the shape and direction
> of [math]. If a move did happen, I wouldn't want to get too far away
> from Jakarta Commons. But its something to consider, yes.
>
> -Mark
>
> Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
>> Those of you not subscribed to general@commons.apache.org may want
>> to, as
>> there is some talk there of future locations of components currently
>> in j-c.
>> [math] would, IMHO, make a good candidate for moving to Apache Commons
>> (different from Jakarta Commons if you didn't know). Certainly a
>> separate
>> mailing list seems valid.
>> Stephen
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "__matthewHawthorne" <ma...@phreaker.net>
>>> +1, and I think [hivemind] could use a separate list also.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some
>>>> interest
>>>> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off
>>>> to
>>>> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
>>>> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just
>>>> PLAIN
>>>> OUT THERE... ;)
>>>>
>>>> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
>>>> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
>>>> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>>>>
>>>> -Mark
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
> --
> Mark Diggory
> Software Developer
> Harvard MIT Data Center
> http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
I think at some point in the future, we're going to see both "Generic
API's" and separate projects that are not necessarily Jakarta Commons
fodder arise out of [math]. I'd like to consider an eventual future
where these projects may need to have a more "top level" home such as
Commons or Jakarta. Right now we're very java oriented though, I
personally feel very emboldened with the process of the commons and
savor its existing community (thats right, I said "savor"). Its
processes are having a very positive effect on the shape and direction
of [math]. If a move did happen, I wouldn't want to get too far away
from Jakarta Commons. But its something to consider, yes.
-Mark
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Those of you not subscribed to general@commons.apache.org may want to, as
> there is some talk there of future locations of components currently in j-c.
> [math] would, IMHO, make a good candidate for moving to Apache Commons
> (different from Jakarta Commons if you didn't know). Certainly a separate
> mailing list seems valid.
> Stephen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "__matthewHawthorne" <ma...@phreaker.net>
>
>>+1, and I think [hivemind] could use a separate list also.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>>
>>>I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
>>>in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
>>>another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
>>>about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
>>>OUT THERE... ;)
>>>
>>>If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
>>>possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
>>>theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>>>
>>>-Mark
>>>
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
Those of you not subscribed to general@commons.apache.org may want to, as
there is some talk there of future locations of components currently in j-c.
[math] would, IMHO, make a good candidate for moving to Apache Commons
(different from Jakarta Commons if you didn't know). Certainly a separate
mailing list seems valid.
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "__matthewHawthorne" <ma...@phreaker.net>
> +1, and I think [hivemind] could use a separate list also.
>
>
>
>
> Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> > I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
> > in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
> > another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
> > about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
> > OUT THERE... ;)
> >
> > If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
> > possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
> > theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
> >
> > -Mark
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by __matthewHawthorne <ma...@phreaker.net>.
+1, and I think [hivemind] could use a separate list also.
Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
> OUT THERE... ;)
>
> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>
> -Mark
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: R: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Can't say I'd noticed it being that noisy. I'd much rather see Jelly or
Hivemind leave the mail list than Math.
-0.
Hen
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Angelo Guido wrote:
> +1
>
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Mark R. Diggory [mailto:mdiggory@latte.harvard.edu]
> Inviato: sabato 8 novembre 2003 0.09
> A: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Oggetto: [all] Separate email list for math development?
>
>
> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
> OUT THERE... ;)
>
> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>
> -Mark
>
> --
> Mark Diggory
> Software Developer
> Harvard MIT Data Center
> http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
R: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by Angelo Guido <gu...@tiscali.it>.
+1
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Mark R. Diggory [mailto:mdiggory@latte.harvard.edu]
Inviato: sabato 8 novembre 2003 0.09
A: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Oggetto: [all] Separate email list for math development?
I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
OUT THERE... ;)
If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
-Mark
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by John Keyes <jb...@mac.com>.
>>> Its a tough call, I'm not quite convinced theres enough [math]
>>> activity yet (even though I opened up the discussion). I fact, there
>>> was a long period in the fall where we didn't open any new
>>> discussions about math.
>> My reason for commenting on this thread is to see if we can
>> identify a real problem rather than segregating projects
>> from the community.
>> -John K
> Sounds good, my concern was that others in the community were not
> happy with the amount of math traffic. The idea of an alternate list
> was just one possible direction. I agree that causing project
> segregation is a big concern and we should avoid allowing it to
> happen. However, as commons grows larger (or as projects outgrow the
> commons), there may be cases where this is neccessary.
I think the Wiki could play a part here where design decisions are
edited and recorded. I haven't thought this through yet.
-John K
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
John Keyes wrote:
>> I think the concern is more so that the content (mathematical
>> algorithms) is outside the scope of interest of the Commons in
>> general, while the discussions concerning package design are
>> interesting to commons in general. This is much in the same way that
>> the Http protocol discussions of HttpClient were too subject specific
>> to be of interest of Commons and thus a new list was spawned for that
>> subject matter.
>
>
> From what I remember HttpClient was granted a dedicated list
> purely based on the high level of traffic. I cannot see
> any real benefits of creating new lists purely on this basis
> (apart from the bandwidth saved, though if this is a concern
> you would probably be receiving digest mails or use gmane).
>
>> "Commons Math Developers" would be a list where discussion about
>> internal algorithm issues can be discussed without the huge amounts of
>> email we generate in the process getting dumped into the commons
>> developer list and requiring filtering by everyone else.
>>
>> Of course we would promote that many Commons Developers actually join
>> both lists and it still would be highly promoted that issues
>> concerning the interaction of math with other Commons components be
>> discussed on the Commons Developer list directly.
>
>
> This means we have automatically complicated the interaction
> between Math developers and their community. I just see
> this as another layer of unnecessary indirection.
>
Probibly true.
>> Its a tough call, I'm not quite convinced theres enough [math]
>> activity yet (even though I opened up the discussion). I fact, there
>> was a long period in the fall where we didn't open any new discussions
>> about math.
>
>
> My reason for commenting on this thread is to see if we can
> identify a real problem rather than segregating projects
> from the community.
>
> -John K
>
Sounds good, my concern was that others in the community were not happy
with the amount of math traffic. The idea of an alternate list was just
one possible direction. I agree that causing project segregation is a
big concern and we should avoid allowing it to happen. However, as
commons grows larger (or as projects outgrow the commons), there may be
cases where this is neccessary.
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by John Keyes <jb...@mac.com>.
> I think the concern is more so that the content (mathematical
> algorithms) is outside the scope of interest of the Commons in
> general, while the discussions concerning package design are
> interesting to commons in general. This is much in the same way that
> the Http protocol discussions of HttpClient were too subject specific
> to be of interest of Commons and thus a new list was spawned for that
> subject matter.
From what I remember HttpClient was granted a dedicated list
purely based on the high level of traffic. I cannot see
any real benefits of creating new lists purely on this basis
(apart from the bandwidth saved, though if this is a concern
you would probably be receiving digest mails or use gmane).
> "Commons Math Developers" would be a list where discussion about
> internal algorithm issues can be discussed without the huge amounts of
> email we generate in the process getting dumped into the commons
> developer list and requiring filtering by everyone else.
>
> Of course we would promote that many Commons Developers actually join
> both lists and it still would be highly promoted that issues
> concerning the interaction of math with other Commons components be
> discussed on the Commons Developer list directly.
This means we have automatically complicated the interaction
between Math developers and their community. I just see
this as another layer of unnecessary indirection.
> Its a tough call, I'm not quite convinced theres enough [math]
> activity yet (even though I opened up the discussion). I fact, there
> was a long period in the fall where we didn't open any new discussions
> about math.
My reason for commenting on this thread is to see if we can
identify a real problem rather than segregating projects
from the community.
-John K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu>.
I think the concern is more so that the content (mathematical
algorithms) is outside the scope of interest of the Commons in general,
while the discussions concerning package design are interesting to
commons in general. This is much in the same way that the Http protocol
discussions of HttpClient were too subject specific to be of interest of
Commons and thus a new list was spawned for that subject matter.
"Commons Math Developers" would be a list where discussion about
internal algorithm issues can be discussed without the huge amounts of
email we generate in the process getting dumped into the commons
developer list and requiring filtering by everyone else.
Of course we would promote that many Commons Developers actually join
both lists and it still would be highly promoted that issues concerning
the interaction of math with other Commons components be discussed on
the Commons Developer list directly.
Its a tough call, I'm not quite convinced theres enough [math] activity
yet (even though I opened up the discussion). I fact, there was a long
period in the fall where we didn't open any new discussions about math.
-Mark
John Keyes wrote:
> Is the goal to reduce the traffic on commons-dev?
> Are mail filters not sufficient?
>
> On a general note, a policy should be in place stating
> that if a commons project gets its own dev mailing list
> a PMC member MUST be subscribed to it.
>
> -John K
>
> On 8 Nov 2003, at 18:57, David Graham wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> David
>>
>> --- "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
>>> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
>>> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
>>> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
>>> OUT THERE... ;)
>>>
>>> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
>>> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
>>> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>>>
>>> -Mark
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark Diggory
>>> Software Developer
>>> Harvard MIT Data Center
>>> http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
>> http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by John Keyes <jb...@mac.com>.
Is the goal to reduce the traffic on commons-dev?
Are mail filters not sufficient?
On a general note, a policy should be in place stating
that if a commons project gets its own dev mailing list
a PMC member MUST be subscribed to it.
-John K
On 8 Nov 2003, at 18:57, David Graham wrote:
> +1
>
> David
>
> --- "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
>> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
>> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
>> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
>> OUT THERE... ;)
>>
>> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
>> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
>> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>>
>> -Mark
>>
>> --
>> Mark Diggory
>> Software Developer
>> Harvard MIT Data Center
>> http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
> http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [all] Separate email list for math development?
Posted by David Graham <gr...@yahoo.com>.
+1
David
--- "Mark R. Diggory" <md...@latte.harvard.edu> wrote:
> I know from positions taken by Craig and others there is some interest
> in seeing some of the discussion in the math project get moved off to
> another list. I know that sometimes the lengthy discussions we have
> about what must appear to some to be like "String Theory", just PLAIN
> OUT THERE... ;)
>
> If its really in the publics interest, I'd be willing to propose
> possibly starting a separate math developers list. Let me know if
> theres really a consensus of opinion on this.
>
> -Mark
>
> --
> Mark Diggory
> Software Developer
> Harvard MIT Data Center
> http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org