You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tiles.apache.org by Mck <mc...@apache.org> on 2011/06/22 11:10:44 UTC
[VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Please consider the promotion of Tiles 3 and related projects from
sandbox to the main development trunk.
The projects involved in this promotion are:
Tiles request microframework:
http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles-request/
Tiles Autotag:
http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles-autotag/
Tiles 3: http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles3/
JIRA components:
Tiles request microframework and Tiles 3:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILESSB/component/12313360
Tiles Autotag:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILESSB/component/12313361
If you have had a chance to review, or follow the discussions around,
the sandbox projects, please respond with a vote on their promotion in
the following way:
+1: let's promote them!
+0: tend to agree on the promotion, but had no chance to review the
projects deeply;
-0: tend to disagree on the promotion, but won't veto it;
-1: don't promote them (please explain why).
As this is an informal vote we're only looking for three +1s and no -1s.
~mck
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 4:30 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sorry Greg i actually forgot you did this...
> As i did the same thing and created a TILES_2_3_X branch.
> I'll delete it as you're correct in that it is a continuation of the
> 2_2_x code.
I noticed that. No worries. I suspect the 2_3 branch and 2_2 branch
are pretty much identical, so it's probably ok to delete the 2_3 if
you like.
Greg
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 11:44 -0500, Greg Reddin wrote:
> In hindsight I probably should have moved framework/trunk
> to framework branches/TILES_2_2 and then moved sandbox/trunk to
> framework/trunk. If you'd like to do it that way then feel free to svn
> rm the branch I just created.
Sorry Greg i actually forgot you did this...
As i did the same thing and created a TILES_2_3_X branch.
I'll delete it as you're correct in that it is a continuation of the
2_2_x code.
Otherwise I have now moved sandbox/trunk to framework/trunk.
I'll write up for the users list tomorrow.
~mck
--
"Physics is to math what sex is to masturbation." Richard Feynman
| www.semb.wever.org | www.sesat.no
| tech.finn.no | http://xss-http-filter.sf.net
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> +1: let's promote them!
>> +0: tend to agree on the promotion, but had no chance to review the
>> projects deeply;
>> -0: tend to disagree on the promotion, but won't veto it;
>> -1: don't promote them (please explain why).
>
> +1.
FYI you may have intended to do this anyway, but I just created a
TILES_2_2 branch to support any patches that need to be made to the
2.2 series. In hindsight I probably should have moved framework/trunk
to framework branches/TILES_2_2 and then moved sandbox/trunk to
framework/trunk. If you'd like to do it that way then feel free to svn
rm the branch I just created.
Thanks,
Greg
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1: let's promote them!
> +0: tend to agree on the promotion, but had no chance to review the
> projects deeply;
> -0: tend to disagree on the promotion, but won't veto it;
> -1: don't promote them (please explain why).
+1.
When Antonio originally posted the vote he asked for (as I understood
it) +1's only from people who were committing to actively contribute
to the code. At the time I was unable to commit to that so I think the
vote died. I'm changing my stance now for the following reasons:
1) We've all informally agreed that we don't see much development
future for the Tiles 2x branch, so there's really no reason to
preserve that as the main development line. All of the interest at
this point seems to be pointing towards the 3x line, so let's go ahead
and move that forward.
2) I'm still not in a position where I can commit to active work on
this code, but I am willing to "mentor" the work of others by
providing a voice on the PMC. That means I'm willing to review the
code, check, and vote on releases. If it so happens that I become
comfortable enough with the code to answer support questions, then
I'll also provide support on the users@ list.
I think it is prudent for us as the Tiles PMC to monitor this very
closely. I see this as a final opportunity for the PMC to go active
again. If it does not happen within a reasonable period of time, the
responsible move (IMO) would be for us to go to the attic. If it does
happen and my level of activity remains what it is today, the
responsible thing for me would be to go emeritus (after growing the
PMC with more active members). So, I'm just saying that to fully flesh
out my position on this. I really hope it works out and I'll do what I
can to contribute.
Greg
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Mck <mc...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 11:10 +0200, Mck wrote:
> +1: let's promote them!
+1
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2011/6/22 Mck <mc...@apache.org>
>
> +1: let's promote them!
>
+1, if you promote tiles-eval too ;-) (it might be dropped if you don't like
it).
Antonio
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Nathan Bubna <nb...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Please consider the promotion of Tiles 3 and related projects from
> sandbox to the main development trunk.
>
> The projects involved in this promotion are:
> Tiles request microframework:
> http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles-request/
> Tiles Autotag:
> http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles-autotag/
> Tiles 3: http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles3/
>
> JIRA components:
> Tiles request microframework and Tiles 3:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILESSB/component/12313360
> Tiles Autotag:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILESSB/component/12313361
>
> If you have had a chance to review, or follow the discussions around,
> the sandbox projects, please respond with a vote on their promotion in
> the following way:
>
> +1: let's promote them!
+1
> +0: tend to agree on the promotion, but had no chance to review the
> projects deeply;
> -0: tend to disagree on the promotion, but won't veto it;
> -1: don't promote them (please explain why).
>
> As this is an informal vote we're only looking for three +1s and no -1s.
>
> ~mck
>
Re: [VOTE] Promote Tiles 3 from sandbox (take2)
Posted by Nathan Bubna <nb...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Please consider the promotion of Tiles 3 and related projects from
> sandbox to the main development trunk.
>
> The projects involved in this promotion are:
> Tiles request microframework:
> http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles-request/
> Tiles Autotag:
> http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles-autotag/
> Tiles 3: http://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/tiles/sandbox/trunk/tiles3/
>
> JIRA components:
> Tiles request microframework and Tiles 3:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILESSB/component/12313360
> Tiles Autotag:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILESSB/component/12313361
>
> If you have had a chance to review, or follow the discussions around,
> the sandbox projects, please respond with a vote on their promotion in
> the following way:
>
> +1: let's promote them!
+1
> +0: tend to agree on the promotion, but had no chance to review the
> projects deeply;
> -0: tend to disagree on the promotion, but won't veto it;
> -1: don't promote them (please explain why).
>
> As this is an informal vote we're only looking for three +1s and no -1s.
>
> ~mck
>