You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> on 2005/12/27 17:44:47 UTC
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
Hen
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>
To: jcp-open@apache.org
Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Starting a java specs project
One idea was to collate them as a part of Jakarta.
My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them into
Jakarta Commons, leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta (I know, you didn't think
you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would have the potential to
serve two roles:
1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would help
bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the Commons
community would make good stewards for the code if the various owners departed.
Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to rejuvenate
Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP specs could be
stored there too.
Not trying to intrude on the JCP stuff though, so I can see if it's preferred
to keep things under a strictly JCP-oriented environment.
Hen
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> There has been some discussion on creating a Java specs project which would
> hold all the specs jars from the various JSRs as well as other standards,
> e.g. CORBA. Often, there are many duplicate "copies" of the source code for
> the same JSR floating around in different Apache projects. It would be a
> great idea to move them all into one project. This idea, so far, has been
> met with much enthusiasm.
>
> How do we get this started?
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Second FYI, the external to Jakarta part of the specs thread is going on
at general@incubator.
Hen
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
> feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
>
> Hen
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
> From: Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>
> To: jcp-open@apache.org
> Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Starting a java specs project
>
>
> One idea was to collate them as a part of Jakarta.
>
> My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them
> into Jakarta Commons, leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta (I know, you didn't
> think you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would have the
> potential to serve two roles:
>
> 1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
> 2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
>
> Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would
> help bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the Commons
> community would make good stewards for the code if the various owners
> departed.
>
> Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to
> rejuvenate Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP specs
> could be stored there too.
>
> Not trying to intrude on the JCP stuff though, so I can see if it's preferred
> to keep things under a strictly JCP-oriented environment.
>
> Hen
>
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> There has been some discussion on creating a Java specs project which would
>> hold all the specs jars from the various JSRs as well as other standards,
>> e.g. CORBA. Often, there are many duplicate "copies" of the source code
>> for the same JSR floating around in different Apache projects. It would be
>> a great idea to move them all into one project. This idea, so far, has
>> been met with much enthusiasm.
>>
>> How do we get this started?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: jakarta future WAS: Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Brett Porter wrote:
> Thinking more about this, I don't know about "pushing things into
> commons". The important thing is consistent practices, consolidated
> committers and community, but maybe not the naming. Jakarta BCEL
> sounds fine to stay that way, as does Jakarta Commons Collections.
I was originally thinking it would be more like Jakarta Collections than
Jakarta Commons BCEL. But a good point, the naming is not a biggy. It'd be
pretty loose I think, the same way Tomcat was Apache Tomcat even while it
was still in Jakarta. Commons is a community and a way, rather than just
an svn directory.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: jakarta future WAS: Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>.
Hi Phil,
On 12/28/05, Phil Steitz <ph...@steitz.com> wrote:
> Thanks again. So the real problem is "disjointness." It seems then that
> we have three logical alternatives:
I don't think there is a lot of difference any of these. Jakarta
commons as a TLP is basically (1) as well. There are definitely some
details to sort out, but they are all along the same track.
Thinking more about this, I don't know about "pushing things into
commons". The important thing is consistent practices, consolidated
committers and community, but maybe not the naming. Jakarta BCEL
sounds fine to stay that way, as does Jakarta Commons Collections.
For scalability, I don't see there is a problem dealing with that in
the near future in commons-user or commons-dev (if the notifications
from SVN, JIRA, Gump, etc go to a different list). List traffic seems
the only barrier here - but I think these are issues to deal with
during growth, not up front.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: jakarta future WAS: Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>
>> The biggest problem with Jakarta currently is that we've become
>> increasingly disjoint. In many ways we are less healthy than we were 4
>> years ago. We have less projects, but much less in the way of intersection
>> between communities. We've replaced a 7 person sub-board
>> with a single chair [though there is now quite a clear direction for
>> that single chair].
>
> Thanks again. So the real problem is "disjointness." It seems then that
> we have three logical alternatives:
>
> 0) Full disintegration - all projects (incl j-c) become TLPs or die and
> Jakarta effectively dies as a concept.
>
> 1) "Commons or bust" - lump small components (e.g. BCEL, ORO) into j-c
> and move the others (e.g. Tapestry, Jmeter, Cactus) to TLP. Keep
> jakarta-general around and the Jakarta site for general Java
> community-building across apache.
As Brett pointed out, this is really 0). I effectively a) don't want to
mess around with the commons.apache.org conversation again and b) think
there is a real synergy between Jakarta Commons and Java Federation.
> 2) Re-aggregate - divide Jakarta up into a small number of "cohesive"
> aggregates. Its not clear to me how this would work or if this kind of
> "encouraged merging" is a good idea; but it is logically the same sort
> of thing that you are hinting at in 1).
Yep, this is a further idea I'd mentioned somewhere but I forget where.
Folding into Commons means an increase in noise, though the ones that
would get folded in aren't that noisy. Largely they're ones that members
of the Commons community are already juggling, or whose single committer
would really benefit from the shared community.
However, I think if we find the noise too much, then we can group things.
They're categorically not subprojcts, just groupings. HttpClient is
already heading this way, it's now the HTTP-Group of Jakarta Components,
with a little bit of artistic license on my part :)
Silk would be the Web-Group of Jakarta Components [I've been unable to get
anything firm on the Silk name, so for the last few weeks I've put it on
the backburner as this series of ideas would trump it].
ORO, Regexp and Codec form a natural group. However they're not noisy so
they would remain on the commons-dev/commons-user mailing lists. It'd be a
bit confusing, but I'd like to set it up so that if a grouping goes quiet,
it is directed towards rejoining the main list.
We do have a problem with noise, and I think we need to try some new ideas
out. Like setting up Jyve at long last :) I sat with a Jyve developer at
ApacheCon and he did a good job of answering the usual problems with
handling a forum side by side with a mailing list.
Another is to come up with a better way of monitoring svn, wiki and
jira/bugzilla changes. Maybe we could aggregate them into reports?
> 0) seems a shame from the "Java community" and "Jakarta brand" (whatever
> that means) standpoint; but may be the most reasonable thing to do. My
> concern with 1) is that j-c is already having trouble scaling and I am
> not so sure that once things are merged in (or out) there is anything
> substantial left for "Jakarta" to be (i.e., I am having a hard time
> seeing the real practical difference between 0) and 1)). I have to
The big one is the hopeful synergy between Jakarta as a federation and
Jakarta as a commons. You can tell I'm in sales mode, I've said that word
twice now.
On a larger scale, I think this might be a nice pattern for the ASF.
Federations who manage just the shared components as a Commons, while also
being the shared conversation place.
> confess to having no idea how to do 2), but maybe others in the
> community do - ideally people working on projects that might want to
> "aggregrate."
There's a bit of that; I'm hoping Cactus and JMeter would form a
testing.apache.org if they so choose; but largely I can't see a lot of
aggregation reasons. Apart from creating TLPs that are all tiny Commons
groupings, which just splits up the parts of shared community we do have.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
jakarta future WAS: Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@steitz.com>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>
<snip/>
>>
>> It would be great if we could get a consensus on what an "umbrella"
>> is and
>
>
> An umbrella is a joining of disjoint communities under a common TLP.
> A non-umbrella is one in which the whole project is a part of the
> same community.
Nice definition. Thanks.
<snip/>
>
> The biggest problem with Jakarta currently is that we've become
> increasingly disjoint. In many ways we are less healthy than we were
> 4 years ago. We have less projects, but much less in the way of
> intersection between communities. We've replaced a 7 person sub-board
> with a single chair [though there is now quite a clear direction for
> that single chair].
Thanks again. So the real problem is "disjointness." It seems then that
we have three logical alternatives:
0) Full disintegration - all projects (incl j-c) become TLPs or die and
Jakarta effectively dies as a concept.
1) "Commons or bust" - lump small components (e.g. BCEL, ORO) into j-c
and move the others (e.g. Tapestry, Jmeter, Cactus) to TLP. Keep
jakarta-general around and the Jakarta site for general Java
community-building across apache.
2) Re-aggregate - divide Jakarta up into a small number of "cohesive"
aggregates. Its not clear to me how this would work or if this kind of
"encouraged merging" is a good idea; but it is logically the same sort
of thing that you are hinting at in 1).
0) seems a shame from the "Java community" and "Jakarta brand" (whatever
that means) standpoint; but may be the most reasonable thing to do. My
concern with 1) is that j-c is already having trouble scaling and I am
not so sure that once things are merged in (or out) there is anything
substantial left for "Jakarta" to be (i.e., I am having a hard time
seeing the real practical difference between 0) and 1)). I have to
confess to having no idea how to do 2), but maybe others in the
community do - ideally people working on projects that might want to
"aggregrate."
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>> An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
>> feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
>>
> See interspersed. I am not quite to the "+" point yet, but probably either
> just missing some concepts / principles or interested in understanding better
> what the alternatives are.
Answers inline. Thanks for the reply, this is the first time I've probably
listed all of these bits together as a strategy, so I apologise for any
surprise.
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
>> From: Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>
>> To: jcp-open@apache.org
>> Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Starting a java specs project
>>
>>
>> One idea was to collate them as a part of Jakarta.
>>
>> My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them
>> into Jakarta Commons,
>
> The risk there is j-c becoming the new "umbrella." We are also having enough
> trouble scaling j-c now.
>
>> leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta
>
> It would be great if we could get a consensus on what an "umbrella" is and
An umbrella is a joining of disjoint communities under a common TLP. A
non-umbrella is one in which the whole project is a part of the same
community.
That's a nicely grey definition :) It allows for things to be becoming
less non-umbrella and more umbrella. ie) Struts now has two subprojects
and their concern is to make sure that they stay focused on the one
community.
> what is bad about it. I don't want to open too many cans of worms here; but
> not all of us were around for the "good old bad old days" of Jakarta. It
> seems to me that all of the following could now be considered "umbrellas" in
> some sense, but we (apache) seem to be collectively OK with them:
Some of the below are definitely listed as 'heading that way', but I don't
want to get mired down in that, it's the boards worry as to when they
become too much umbrella and too little single-community.
> Geronimo
> Web Services
> XML
> Struts
> DB
> Logging
> Portals
>
> But somehow Jakarta is "too big." If you look at all of the code now coming
I don't think Jakarta's considered too big anymore. A lot of this is being
driven by my wanting to rekindle the positive sides of the old Jakarta,
and wanting to finish what was started. It might be the librarian in me,
but the current state of Jakarta has no raison d'etre. It's just a clump
of legacy.
The biggest problem with Jakarta currently is that we've become
increasingly disjoint. In many ways we are less healthy than we were 4
years ago. We have less projects, but much less in the way of intersection
between communities. We've replaced a 7 person sub-board with a single
chair [though there is now quite a clear direction for that single chair].
> into Geronimo with the incubations in progress, it will be larger than
> Jakarta currently is soon. So why exactly do we need to either mash, e.g.
> Hivemind into Commons or move it to TLP? If the answer is "PMC oversight"
> then why doesn't that apply to the projects above as well? We have made a
> lot of progress - mostly thanks to you, Hen - getting adequate PMC
> representation from all Jakarta projects, so I don't see that as such a big
> concern any more.
>
> So what problem exactly are we trying to solve by pushing things out or
> mashing them into Commons? I don't mean to be argumentative here, I just
> want to understand clearly what the goal is and what our acceptable options
> are. It would be great to have some principles on what kinds of "aggregates"
> (euphemism for "umbrellas" ;-) are OK and what kinds are not. Based on these
> principles, we might decide to divide Jakarta differently, creating some
> smaller aggregates rather than one big one (j-c) and a string of small TLPs.
One vibrant community, with a future and a reason to exist. A place for
Java@Apache people to get together and a folding of two (or more) sets of
problems [inactivity, innovation, neutral ground] into a single space
instead of the current multiple spaces. ie) Jakarta has the same problems
with BCEL that Commons has with BeanUtils.
>> (I know,
>> you didn't think you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would
>> have the potential to serve two roles:
>>
>> 1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
>> 2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
>
> While j-c might have begun as 2), this is no longer the whole story, or even
> the main story any more.
It's still an important part of the story. Many of our components are
being released in Commons because Struts needs updates etc.
>> Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would
>> help bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the
>> Commons community would make good stewards for the code if the various
>> owners departed.
>>
> We already have too much orphaned code in j-c, IMHO. The advantage of
> bringing this stuff to j-c would be bringing in some more active and engaged
> committers. This I am sure we would all welcome. Orphaned code we would
> not.
I agree, it's a current problem. My reasons for the (rather bombastic I
admit) statement was that a) it's best to locate the problem in one space,
b) j-c has and is working on the problem and c) j-c committers are used to
dealing with the problem.
I don't think bringing the spec stuff in will drive up activity; I'm
assuming spec code, especially this kind, tends to be pretty low in
implementation and there won't be a huge amount of work necessary. Rather
it's about reidentifying Jakarta as the place to share Java at Apache.
If the spec code has more activity, it will bring in developers, but at
the worst it's effects are more secondary.
> Maintaining this code will require some specialized expertise most likely
> concentrated in projects like Geronimo, Tomcat, etc. If committers from
> these projects are interested and willing to sign up to actively support the
> code in j-c (including responding to user questions), I am sure we will be
> happy to have them join us. I would be hesitant to volunteer the j-c
> community, however, as a support mechanism without ongoing active involvement
> from the apache projects using the specs, though.
Right. When I say j-c community, I mean the j-c community way instead of
the particular people in the community right now.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@steitz.com>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
> feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
>
See interspersed. I am not quite to the "+" point yet, but probably
either just missing some concepts / principles or interested in
understanding better what the alternatives are.
> Hen
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
> From: Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>
> To: jcp-open@apache.org
> Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Starting a java specs project
>
>
> One idea was to collate them as a part of Jakarta.
>
> My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten
> them into Jakarta Commons,
The risk there is j-c becoming the new "umbrella." We are also having
enough trouble scaling j-c now.
> leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta
It would be great if we could get a consensus on what an "umbrella" is
and what is bad about it. I don't want to open too many cans of worms
here; but not all of us were around for the "good old bad old days" of
Jakarta. It seems to me that all of the following could now be
considered "umbrellas" in some sense, but we (apache) seem to be
collectively OK with them:
Geronimo
Web Services
XML
Struts
DB
Logging
Portals
But somehow Jakarta is "too big." If you look at all of the code now
coming into Geronimo with the incubations in progress, it will be larger
than Jakarta currently is soon. So why exactly do we need to either
mash, e.g. Hivemind into Commons or move it to TLP? If the answer is
"PMC oversight" then why doesn't that apply to the projects above as
well? We have made a lot of progress - mostly thanks to you, Hen -
getting adequate PMC representation from all Jakarta projects, so I
don't see that as such a big concern any more.
So what problem exactly are we trying to solve by pushing things out or
mashing them into Commons? I don't mean to be argumentative here, I
just want to understand clearly what the goal is and what our acceptable
options are. It would be great to have some principles on what kinds of
"aggregates" (euphemism for "umbrellas" ;-) are OK and what kinds are
not. Based on these principles, we might decide to divide Jakarta
differently, creating some smaller aggregates rather than one big one
(j-c) and a string of small TLPs.
(I know,
> you didn't think you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would
> have the potential to serve two roles:
>
> 1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
> 2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
While j-c might have begun as 2), this is no longer the whole story, or
even the main story any more.
>
> Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it
> would help bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and
> the Commons community would make good stewards for the code if the
> various owners departed.
>
We already have too much orphaned code in j-c, IMHO. The advantage of
bringing this stuff to j-c would be bringing in some more active and
engaged committers. This I am sure we would all welcome. Orphaned code
we would not.
Maintaining this code will require some specialized expertise most
likely concentrated in projects like Geronimo, Tomcat, etc. If
committers from these projects are interested and willing to sign up to
actively support the code in j-c (including responding to user
questions), I am sure we will be happy to have them join us. I would be
hesitant to volunteer the j-c community, however, as a support mechanism
without ongoing active involvement from the apache projects using the
specs, though.
> Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to
> rejuvenate Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP
> specs could be stored there too.
>
> Not trying to intrude on the JCP stuff though, so I can see if it's
> preferred to keep things under a strictly JCP-oriented environment.
>
> Hen
>
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> There has been some discussion on creating a Java specs project which
>> would hold all the specs jars from the various JSRs as well as other
>> standards, e.g. CORBA. Often, there are many duplicate "copies" of
>> the source code for the same JSR floating around in different Apache
>> projects. It would be a great idea to move them all into one
>> project. This idea, so far, has been met with much enthusiasm.
>>
>> How do we get this started?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> Hola,
>
>> An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
>> feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
>
> Not going too far: these are good ideas IMHO.
>
>> My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them
>> into
>> Jakarta Commons, leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta (I know, you didn't think
>> you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would have the potential to
>> serve two roles:
>>
>> 1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
>> 2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
>
> Why Jakarta Commons and not just Jakarta? I thought either move to a
> TLP or be a normal jakarta project as the two options, essentially
> making Jakarta itself a Commons of sorts.
At first I was thinking that we should be doing a full fold. The downside
of that is that we have two very strong brands, Jakarta and Commons, and
it'd suck to have to throw one of them away. The spec and conversation
ideas came about at ApacheCon and apart from their advantages in driving
the Apache community to the common meeting-place, they allow us to keep
both brands.
Jakarta - name of project
Jakarta General - name of common conversation
Jakarta Commons - name of common code [with accompanying mail lists]
Jakarta Spec [maybe] - if we choose to differentiate from commons
>> Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would
>> help
>> bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the Commons
>> community would make good stewards for the code if the various owners
>> departed.
>
> We need to keep in mind that commit access to specific spec modules
> may be restricted in a manner slightly different than the usual
> Jakarta way, e.g. to only members of the relevant Expert Group. (For
> example, not all Tomcat committers can modify jakarta-servletapi-5).
Good point. We'd probably want to have a Jakarta Spec and a Jakarta
Commons differentiation then.
>> Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to
>> rejuvenate
>> Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP specs could be
>> stored there too.
>
> Nice. Some OASIS stuff comes to mind.
Yup. It's one of important selling points I think; Jakarta is neutral
ground for much of Apache I think, so it's a good place to bring these
kind of things together.
Otherwise we're trying to create independent locations [jcp.apache.org,
oasis.apache.org], or trying to create some new kind of common meeting
place.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hola,
> An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
> feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
Not going too far: these are good ideas IMHO.
> My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them
> into
> Jakarta Commons, leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta (I know, you didn't think
> you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would have the potential to
> serve two roles:
>
> 1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
> 2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
Why Jakarta Commons and not just Jakarta? I thought either move to a
TLP or be a normal jakarta project as the two options, essentially
making Jakarta itself a Commons of sorts.
> Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would
> help
> bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the Commons
> community would make good stewards for the code if the various owners
> departed.
We need to keep in mind that commit access to specific spec modules
may be restricted in a manner slightly different than the usual
Jakarta way, e.g. to only members of the relevant Expert Group. (For
example, not all Tomcat committers can modify jakarta-servletapi-5).
> Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to
> rejuvenate
> Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP specs could be
> stored there too.
Nice. Some OASIS stuff comes to mind.
--
Yoav Shapira
System Design and Management Fellow
MIT Sloan School of Management
Cambridge, MA, USA
yoavs@computer.org / www.yoavshapira.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
Posted by db...@baybroadband.net.
+1
-----Original Message-----
From: "Henri Yandell" <ba...@generationjava.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 11:44 am
To: general@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: [SPAM] Re: Starting a java specs project (fwd)
An FYI. Please kick me if I'm going too far with these ideas; I get the
feeling I have a general +0, but hard to tell sometimes.
Hen
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>
To: jcp-open@apache.org
Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Starting a java specs project
One idea was to collate them as a part of Jakarta.
My aim for Jakarta is to either promote subprojects to TLP or flatten them
into
Jakarta Commons, leading to a non-umbrella Jakarta (I know, you didn't think
you'd see it in your lifetime). This new Jakarta would have the potential to
serve two roles:
1) Place for Java@Apache to share conversation [general@jakarta]
2) Place for Java@Apache to share code [Jakarta Commons]
Storing the spec source there would be good for everyone I think; it would
help
bring people to Jakarta to share code and conversation, and the Commons
community would make good stewards for the code if the various owners
departed.
Some other pluses are that it would help be a part of an attempt to
rejuvenate
Jakarta in 2006 (as a kind of federation) and that non-JCP specs could be
stored there too.
Not trying to intrude on the JCP stuff though, so I can see if it's preferred
to keep things under a strictly JCP-oriented environment.
Hen
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> There has been some discussion on creating a Java specs project which would
> hold all the specs jars from the various JSRs as well as other standards,
> e.g. CORBA. Often, there are many duplicate "copies" of the source code
for
> the same JSR floating around in different Apache projects. It would be a
> great idea to move them all into one project. This idea, so far, has been
> met with much enthusiasm.
>
> How do we get this started?
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org