You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com> on 2002/10/21 21:46:45 UTC
Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
But Nicola Ken, the basic problem is that I don't support the merging of a
Java commons with a non-Java commons. There are way too many issues
generated and few if any benefits. So, I should spend even more of my time
subscribing to yet another list, to get another 50 emails a day, just to say
no.
And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity to vote on it. Its being
presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read your email about it not
being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that way).
This 'reorg' is going to be very community destroying before long.
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
To: "Jakarta General List" <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Cc: <co...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: Naming issues
>
> Michael A. Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >
> >>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> >>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
> >>
> >>This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
> >>Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project
creation.
> >>
> >> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
> > As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> > a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> > something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> > so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> > defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
>
> Yeah, that's why I posted it here!
>
> Come on guys, come over to general@commons.apache.org, let's make
> ourselves heard, help create the rules there, so finally Commons can
> have it's top-level project!
>
> It's not something that has to be imposed, we can help over there!
>
> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
>
> > hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> > strange.
>
> hehehe, when I cross-posted ;-)
>
> Oh, and now I'm at it, here it goes, welcome to the discussion
> commons-dev! :-D
>
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
[...]
> Now, if Apache Commons were
> 1) Just a 'federation' of commons type Apache projects (as per the original
> reorg proposal)
> 2) Not called commons
> that'd be just grand.
1) That's further along the read probably,
what we get now are projects, as the current way.
2) Yeah! :-D
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
> I can see some good use of an apache-commons :
>
> 1) Projects that are implementing eg RFC's that is not language related
> can commonly discuss implementations, have their API's (where usefull)
> about the same.
> 2) Joining expertise
> 3) Clear for the outside : want an http common implementation go to
> http://blah and you find all the possible implementations there
Part of the issue is about the different *types* of (sub sub) projects we
have in (jakarta) commons. Collections/IO/Util/Pattern/Lang potentially make
quite a close group (eg. same committers). JXpath/CLI/HttpClient are much
more independent of each other, just sharing the same space (eg. different
committers for each). Apache commons doesn't help this, it makes it worse.
> 1) Decisions will be a great pain, unless the specific languages can
> acutally make decisions on their own.
> 2) It can get messy in ML's with language specific issues, not even
> speaking about not very interesting commits from the c part of the
> project
I would set my mail filter so all C and Perl messages go straight to trash.
> apache-commons should be there for the outside and for joining
> expertise, so mainly containing a website + mailinglists.
> This way nothing changes, just some things get added.
> The problem with this can be however who will bring parties together in
> such an effort ;))
Now, if Apache Commons were
1) Just a 'federation' of commons type Apache projects (as per the original
reorg proposal)
2) Not called commons
that'd be just grand.
Stephen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net>.
I can see some good use of an apache-commons :
1) Projects that are implementing eg RFC's that is not language related
can commonly discuss implementations, have their API's (where usefull)
about the same.
2) Joining expertise
3) Clear for the outside : want an http common implementation go to
http://blah and you find all the possible implementations there
And some bad :
1) Decisions will be a great pain, unless the specific languages can
acutally make decisions on their own.
2) It can get messy in ML's with language specific issues, not even
speaking about not very interesting commits from the c part of the
project
So I come to my conculsion :
apache-commons should be there for the outside and for joining
expertise, so mainly containing a website + mailinglists.
This way nothing changes, just some things get added.
The problem with this can be however who will bring parties together in
such an effort ;))
Just a mind spin here..
Mvgr,
Martin
On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 21:46, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> But Nicola Ken, the basic problem is that I don't support the merging of a
> Java commons with a non-Java commons. There are way too many issues
> generated and few if any benefits. So, I should spend even more of my time
> subscribing to yet another list, to get another 50 emails a day, just to say
> no.
>
> And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity to vote on it. Its being
> presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read your email about it not
> being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that way).
>
> This 'reorg' is going to be very community destroying before long.
>
> Stephen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
> To: "Jakarta General List" <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
> Cc: <co...@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 8:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Naming issues
>
>
> >
> > Michael A. Smith wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > >
> > >>Why not just decide to move the Jakarta Commons projects to Commons and
> > >>the Sandbox ones to Incubator?
> > >>
> > >>This is not a proposal for a diktat, but a *suggestion* for Jakarta
> > >>Commons projects to take part of the Commons and Incubator Project
> creation.
> > >>
> > >> general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> > > As far as jakarta-commons goes (ignoring the sandbox/incubator), I sent
> > > a message to commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org asking whether this is
> > > something we, as committers on jakarta-commons, wanted to consider, and
> > > so far the only real reaction was major uncertainty due to the lack of
> > > defined structure/procedures in @commons.apache.
> >
> > Yeah, that's why I posted it here!
> >
> > Come on guys, come over to general@commons.apache.org, let's make
> > ourselves heard, help create the rules there, so finally Commons can
> > have it's top-level project!
> >
> > It's not something that has to be imposed, we can help over there!
> >
> > general-subscribe@commons.apache.org
> >
> > > hrrmmm... when'd this thread move from reorg@apache to general@jakarta?
> > > strange.
> >
> > hehehe, when I cross-posted ;-)
> >
> > Oh, and now I'm at it, here it goes, welcome to the discussion
> > commons-dev! :-D
> >
> > --
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> > - verba volant, scripta manent -
> > (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Morgan Delagrange <md...@yahoo.com>.
--- Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
<snip/>
> > And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity
> to vote on it. Its being
> > presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read
> your email about it not
> > being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that
> way).
>
> There is a certain, "you can go your own way, but we
> feel we're bigger
> than you" feeling. Maybe we're just defensive
> though?
>
> Hen
>
To me, it's all hopelessly vague at this point. There
are no details as to how components are accepted,
decisions made, etc. I wrote an email today on the
reorg list trying to encourage elaboration from the
Apache Commons folks, but so far no responses.
I think it's pretty silly that they started the party
and then sent out the invitations. They shouldn't be
surprised when people don't show.
- Morgan
=====
Morgan Delagrange
http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
http://axion.tigris.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/watchdog
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Apache commons [was:Re: Naming issues]
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> But Nicola Ken, the basic problem is that I don't support the merging of a
> Java commons with a non-Java commons. There are way too many issues
> generated and few if any benefits. So, I should spend even more of my time
> subscribing to yet another list, to get another 50 emails a day, just to say
> no.
Yep. The reorg itself isn't bad and the Incubator is a good idea
[commons-sandbox is failing in that respect in my opinion]. But I'm left
wondering why a joint Commons if we make the assumption that I believe in:
1) Sharing a mailing list with other languages is not going to help me. It
might help tomcat and httpd, but not the areas I'm involved in.
I've looked at APR to nick ideas for Java utilities. It really just
doesn't map.
2) Sharing a CVS module will be painful.
3) Sharing a website will be painful.
Once those three axioms are accepted, there is no project community, and
therefore no point for the apache-commons project.
I need to post this to apache-commons methinks :)
> And whats more, no-ones given me any opportunity to vote on it. Its being
> presented as a fait accompli. (And yes I've read your email about it not
> being imposed, but it sure as hell feels that way).
There is a certain, "you can go your own way, but we feel we're bigger
than you" feeling. Maybe we're just defensive though?
Hen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>