Future of RAT

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
RAT report. :-)

IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
[1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
issue.

The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.

WDYT?

Jochen


[1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 11:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>
>> The question is: What's the target?
>
> This came up in a board meeting a while back. The suggestion was infra@
>
>> But Commons would be an excellent choice
>
> It's not really a commons type of project in my view. Commons is about java
> components, RAT is a build/QA tool.
>
> I'd suggest ANT if it wouldn't upset Maven (and vice-versa)

At the last retreat, somebody suggested creating an Util TLP with the
goal of including all these types of projects: not strictly infra, not
really meant for external consumption, either.  RAT could be used to
seed that project, and it would then be joined by other such
utilities.

I'm not against Commons (or Maven, or Ant), but if we go to one of
those locations, it means we're answering this question again the next
time this situation comes up.

-Hyrum

Re: Future of RAT

[Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>]

On 10/08/2010 11:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> The question is: What's the target?

This came up in a board meeting a while back. The suggestion was infra@

> But Commons would be an excellent choice

It's not really a commons type of project in my view. Commons is about 
java components, RAT is a build/QA tool.

I'd suggest ANT if it wouldn't upset Maven (and vice-versa)

Ross

Re: Future of RAT

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process.

There's also an SPDX spec coming to describe the licensing in
products; I could see RAT being very useful there as an automatic
checker against some standard approve/no-approve/exception-list rule
set.

> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

TLP and PMC are technically different questions. An option would be
for a RAT PMC, but to make its web presence part of Infra or Legal
committees.

> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?

+0. I wouldn't want to keep the separate list, package name seems
fine. Commons is a fair choice.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

Forgot one possible issue: Currently, RAT has its own mailing lists,
which would be unusual for Commons. My personal choice would be to
leave this as it is, but that's of course also subject to discussion.

Jochen


On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>



-- 
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:
>
>> How about keeping it here at the Incubator?
>
> I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
> podling.  But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
> Infra would be fine with me if infra wanted to absorb rat.
>

A thing with being part of infra is that the rat people are less
likely to be so actively involved with other infra pmc work and
perhaps visa versa, if it was here at the Incubator i'd hope that it
could really be one pmc group with everyone interested in what rat is
doing and how that relates to what Incubator reviews do.

   ...ant

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:

> How about keeping it here at the Incubator?

I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
podling.  But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
Infra would be fine with me if infra wanted to absorb rat.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>]

On 10/08/2010 12:48, ant elder wrote:
> How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
> project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
> an "eat your own dog food" type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
> burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)


I nearly suggested that too. The reason I deleted that part of my mail 
was because it might send the wrong signal - e.g. only incubating 
projects care bout these things.

But that's just a -0, not a -1. Infra would be a better home in my opinion.

If it were to stay here I'd prefer it to be separated from the rest of 
the clutch though, we don't want a project that does not intend to 
graduate being an example to other projects.

Ross



>
>     ...ant
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
> <si...@it20one.at>  wrote:
>> Hi Jochen,
>>
>> not sure if Commons is the right place sine RAT has a very spezialized scope
>> or to state it differently I would not look for RAT in Commons.
>>
>> What about Maven TLP?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>
>> On 10.08.10 12:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
>>> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
>>> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
>>> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
>>> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
>>> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
>>> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
>>> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
>>> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
>>> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
>>> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
>>> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
>>> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
>>> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
>>> RAT report. :-)
>>>
>>> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
>>> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
>>> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
>>> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
>>> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
>>> issue.
>>>
>>> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
>>> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
>>> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
>>> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
>>> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>>>
>>> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
>>> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
>>> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
>>> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
>>> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
>>> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Jochen
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>


-- 
rgardler@apache.org
@rgardler

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
an "eat your own dog food" type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)

   ...ant

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
<si...@it20one.at> wrote:
> Hi Jochen,
>
> not sure if Commons is the right place sine RAT has a very spezialized scope
> or to state it differently I would not look for RAT in Commons.
>
> What about Maven TLP?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
> On 10.08.10 12:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
>> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
>> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
>> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
>> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
>> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
>> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
>> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
>> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
>> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
>> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
>> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
>> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
>> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
>> RAT report. :-)
>>
>> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
>> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
>> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
>> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
>> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
>> issue.
>>
>> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
>> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
>> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
>> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
>> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>>
>> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
>> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
>> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
>> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
>> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
>> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Jochen
>>
>>
>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Siegfried Goeschl <si...@it20one.at>]

Hi Jochen,

not sure if Commons is the right place sine RAT has a very spezialized 
scope or to state it differently I would not look for RAT in Commons.

What about Maven TLP?

Cheers,

Siegfried Goeschl

On 10.08.10 12:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

Forgot one possible issue: Currently, RAT has its own mailing lists,
which would be unusual for Commons. My personal choice would be to
leave this as it is, but that's of course also subject to discussion.

Jochen


On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>



-- 
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process.

There's also an SPDX spec coming to describe the licensing in
products; I could see RAT being very useful there as an automatic
checker against some standard approve/no-approve/exception-list rule
set.

> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

TLP and PMC are technically different questions. An option would be
for a RAT PMC, but to make its web presence part of Infra or Legal
committees.

> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?

+0. I wouldn't want to keep the separate list, package name seems
fine. Commons is a fair choice.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?

I would support bringing it into commons.

Niall

> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process.

There's also an SPDX spec coming to describe the licensing in
products; I could see RAT being very useful there as an automatic
checker against some standard approve/no-approve/exception-list rule
set.

> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

TLP and PMC are technically different questions. An option would be
for a RAT PMC, but to make its web presence part of Infra or Legal
committees.

> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?

+0. I wouldn't want to keep the separate list, package name seems
fine. Commons is a fair choice.

Hen

Re: Future of RAT

[Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?

I would support bringing it into commons.

Niall

> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>]

I'm +1 for TLP. No need to start creating more umbrella projects. If
finding a chair is troublesome, I'd be more than willing to fill that
gap (although I'm not on the RAT ppmc, nor have written a single line
of code for it). As a mentor and user I love the utility, so keeping
it around and making it a full project would be great.

Martijn


On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>



-- 
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.8

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>]

On 10/08/2010 11:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

 > The question is: What's the target?

This came up in a board meeting a while back. The suggestion was infra@

 > But Commons would be an excellent choice

It's not really a commons type of project in my view. Commons is about 
java components, RAT is a build/QA tool.

I'd suggest ANT if it wouldn't upset Maven (and vice-versa)

Ross

Re: Future of RAT

[Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>]

On Aug 10, 2010, at 6:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

Has this been discussed within the RAT community? I'd be interested to hear the community's opinion.

Why is TLP not an option? 10 experienced ASF members/committers sounds like plenty of oversight for a TLP...

--kevan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip/>
>
> WDYT?


I agree with others who've said RAT should consider going TLP.

-Rahul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

Forgot one possible issue: Currently, RAT has its own mailing lists,
which would be unusual for Commons. My personal choice would be to
leave this as it is, but that's of course also subject to discussion.

Jochen


On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
> RAT report. :-)
>
> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
> issue.
>
> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>
> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Jochen
>
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>



-- 
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip/>
>
> WDYT?


I agree with others who've said RAT should consider going TLP.

-Rahul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:58, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?
>
> Yep i agree, there are already other small TLPs so it doesn't need to
> be an issue, so going TLP does sound ideal.

Yeah. There is no "minimum size" for a TLP. You've been filing reports
to the Incubutor... now you file them to the Board. And "oh no! only
once a quarter!". Heh. If you think an hour every three months is a
hassle, then we need to talk. :-P

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:58, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?
>
> Yep i agree, there are already other small TLPs so it doesn't need to
> be an issue, so going TLP does sound ideal.

Yeah. There is no "minimum size" for a TLP. You've been filing reports
to the Incubutor... now you file them to the Board. And "oh no! only
once a quarter!". Heh. If you think an hour every three months is a
hassle, then we need to talk. :-P

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?

Yep i agree, there are already other small TLPs so it doesn't need to
be an issue, so going TLP does sound ideal.

   ...ant

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?

Yep i agree, there are already other small TLPs so it doesn't need to
be an issue, so going TLP does sound ideal.

   ...ant

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?

Yep i agree, there are already other small TLPs so it doesn't need to
be an issue, so going TLP does sound ideal.

   ...ant

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

RE: Future of RAT

[Gary Gregory <GG...@seagullsoftware.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 07:00
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; rat-dev@incubator.apache.org;
> dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> 
> On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> 
> > However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> > have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> > anyone on the team that would be able to?
> 
> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
> bunch of former PMC chairs.
> 
> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

I tend to agree. Commons seems like a good place.
Gary

> 
> Stefan
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

RE: Future of RAT

[Gary Gregory <GG...@seagullsoftware.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 07:00
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; rat-dev@incubator.apache.org;
> dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> 
> On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> 
> > However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> > have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> > anyone on the team that would be able to?
> 
> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
> bunch of former PMC chairs.
> 
> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

I tend to agree. Commons seems like a good place.
Gary

> 
> Stefan
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

RE: Future of RAT

[Gary Gregory <GG...@seagullsoftware.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 07:00
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; rat-dev@incubator.apache.org;
> dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> 
> On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> 
> > However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> > have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> > anyone on the team that would be able to?
> 
> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
> bunch of former PMC chairs.
> 
> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

I tend to agree. Commons seems like a good place.
Gary

> 
> Stefan
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On 2010-08-10, Mark Struberg wrote:

> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough
> to justify an own TLP.

> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under
> the maven TLP.

RAT > RAT Maven Plugin.  RAT initially was developed at Google Code.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 06:40, Jochen Wiedmann
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>...
> WDYT?

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 15:26, Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com> wrote:
>...
> I'd suggest letting the RAT PPMC decide what they want to do. If they are
> unable to come to a decision, they can come back and ask for more opinions.

They asked for our thoughts, we are answering. No need to shut down
the conversation.

Cheers,
-g

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
>> Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
>>
>> Who are the users of/community for RAT?  If that can be determined  
>> then the
>> TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT  
>> itself.
>>
>> eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the  
>> TLP
>> internal.apache.org.  RAT then just happens to be the first such  
>> "internal"
>> tool.   If other tools for the same community are written, then  
>> they would
>> also go into this TLP.
>
> While I'm not against what you propose at all, I don't think it  
> makes sense
> to use the graduation of RAT in isolation as a vehicle for your  
> proposal
> above. If such a proposal makes sense (after time of seeing more and  
> more
> "internal" Apache tools), then it would make sense to put it forward  
> at that
> time.
>
> In the meanwhile, there is an actionable, concrete proposal here I  
> believe
> for a RAT TLP. +1 to Greg's comments: every TLP doesn't have to be a
> behemoth pseudo-Incubator like many of our other TLPs. Some of them  
> work
> just fine as smaller, driven projects with communities of all sizes.

I'd suggest letting the RAT PPMC decide what they want to do. If they  
are unable to come to a decision, they can come back and ask for more  
opinions.

Craig
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 August 2010 18:20, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS  
>>> size" ?
>>>
>>> Answer: nowhere.
>>>
>>> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
>>> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
>>> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
>>> They have other concerns and focus points.
>>>
>>> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum  
>>> size"
>>> to justify their existence.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -g
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>  
>>> wrote:
>>>> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big  
>>>> enough to
>>> justify
>>>> an own TLP.
>>>> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit  
>>>> under the
>>> maven
>>>> TLP.
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's
>>> required of
>>>>>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at  
>>>>>> least in
>>> Java
>>>>>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF  
>>>>>> policies.
>>> To me,
>>>>>> that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based  
>>>>>> on the
>>>>>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> For  additional commands, e-mail: general- 
>>>>> help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>]

Thanks Jochen!

The reason for this question was: If RAT is really a generic tool, then becoming 
a TLP is imo a valuable option.
Otoh if RAT is hand tailored for ASF internal needs only, then it's really an 
internal project and as such imo doesn't justify the TLP step and should rather 
aim to be part of a 'bigger' thing.

Again I don't have a real opinion on this. I just wanted to get a feeling if 
there is enough 'beef' for a TLP ;)

LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message ----
> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 10:48:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> 
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> 
> >  Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly  
>targeted
> > to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as  such also 
>useful
> > for releasing GPLed or BSL style  projects?
> 
> Unfortunately, there is no clear reply to that  question.
> 
> Technically, RAT is independent from a certain license and  could very
> well be used by other projects. However, I have no idea whether  that
> is the case. I am unaware of any examples.
> 
> Jochen
> 
> -- 
> I  Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 


      

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:

> Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
> to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
> for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?

Unfortunately, there is no clear reply to that question.

Technically, RAT is independent from a certain license and could very
well be used by other projects. However, I have no idea whether that
is the case. I am unaware of any examples.

Jochen

-- 
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
<pg...@p6m7g8.com> wrote:
> On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein<gs...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
>>
>> If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
>> rewrite it in Perl.  Hey, that's not a bad idea!  =P  -- justin

It already *is* being rewritten in Python. :)

-Hyrum

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 22:43, Philip M. Gollucci <pg...@p6m7g8.com> wrote:
> On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein<gs...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
>>
>> If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
>> rewrite it in Perl.  Hey, that's not a bad idea!  =P  -- justin
>
> Joe can rewrite it perl no matter what you do.

"I can write that code in... 120 lines of Python!!"

"I can write that code in... 112 lines of Perl!!"

"Write that code!"

:-P

Cheers,
-g

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_That_Tune

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
<pg...@p6m7g8.com> wrote:
> On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein<gs...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
>>
>> If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
>> rewrite it in Perl.  Hey, that's not a bad idea!  =P  -- justin

It already *is* being rewritten in Python. :)

-Hyrum

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Philip M. Gollucci" <pg...@p6m7g8.com>]

On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein<gs...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
>
> If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
> rewrite it in Perl.  Hey, that's not a bad idea!  =P  -- justin
Joe can rewrite it perl no matter what you do.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70  3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336.9354
VP Apache Infrastructure; Member, Apache Software Foundation
Committer,                        FreeBSD Foundation
Consultant,                       P6M7G8 Inc.
Sr. System Admin,                 Ridecharge Inc.

Work like you don't need the money,
love like you'll never get hurt,
and dance like nobody's watching.

Re: Future of RAT

["Philip M. Gollucci" <pg...@p6m7g8.com>]

On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein<gs...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
>
> If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
> rewrite it in Perl.  Hey, that's not a bad idea!  =P  -- justin
Joe can rewrite it perl no matter what you do.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70  3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336.9354
VP Apache Infrastructure; Member, Apache Software Foundation
Committer,                        FreeBSD Foundation
Consultant,                       P6M7G8 Inc.
Sr. System Admin,                 Ridecharge Inc.

Work like you don't need the money,
love like you'll never get hurt,
and dance like nobody's watching.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?

If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
rewrite it in Perl.  Hey, that's not a bad idea!  =P  -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 15:25, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
> to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
> for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?
>
> If it is still ASF centric, then to me it sounds much more as a subproject of
> infrastructure or legal than an own TLP.
> Of course there is no minimum size for becoming a TLP, but let's be honest: if
> this is not a general technical project but more like a business project then
> there will not be enough community around it. Or better said: the main focus is
> not the tool itself but the modelled business. That's the reason why I would
> move it to this 'business unit' rather than creating a new one.

But we're looking for a direct match between the PMC, its community,
and the cared-for code.

Infra and Legal (and Commons and Maven) have very different alignments
between those three things. A TLP constructed just for RAT will align
all elements, and will (hopefully) provide us with a long-term
community to care for the codebase. Placing it under the stewardship
of a PMC or a VP Infra/Legal who has many other concerns pretty much
asks for it to become ignored over the long haul.

It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?

Cheers,
-g

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>]

Hi!

Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted 
to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful 
for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?

If it is still ASF centric, then to me it sounds much more as a subproject of 
infrastructure or legal than an own TLP.
Of course there is no minimum size for becoming a TLP, but let's be honest: if 
this is not a general technical project but more like a business project then 
there will not be enough community around it. Or better said: the main focus is 
not the tool itself but the modelled business. That's the reason why I would 
move it to this 'business unit' rather than creating a new one.

LieGrue,
strub




----- Original Message ----
> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
> Cc: "rat-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ra...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 7:59:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> > Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
> > 
> > Who are the users of/community for RAT?  If that can be determined  then the
> > TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT  itself.
> > 
> > eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use,  then call the TLP
> > internal.apache.org.  RAT then just  happens to be the first such "internal"
> > tool.   If other tools for  the same community are written, then they would
> > also go into this  TLP.
> 
> While I'm not against what you propose at all, I don't think it  makes sense
> to use the graduation of RAT in isolation as a vehicle for your  proposal
> above. If such a proposal makes sense (after time of seeing more and  more
> "internal" Apache tools), then it would make sense to put it forward at  that
> time.
> 
> In the meanwhile, there is an actionable, concrete proposal  here I believe
> for a RAT TLP. +1 to Greg's comments: every TLP doesn't have  to be a
> behemoth pseudo-Incubator like many of our other TLPs. Some of them  work
> just fine as smaller, driven projects with communities of all  sizes.
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 10  August 2010 18:20, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size"  ?
> >> 
> >> Answer: nowhere.
> >> 
> >> Small  projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
> >> and  the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
> >> developers  and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
> >> They have  other concerns and focus points.
> >> 
> >> TLPs are not  "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> >> to justify  their existence.
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> -g
> >> 
> >> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >>>  RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough  to
> >> justify
> >>> an own TLP.
> >>> It previously  was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the
> >>  maven
> >>> TLP.
> >>> 
> >>>  LieGrue,
> >>> strub
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  ----- Original Message ----
> >>>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
> >>>>  To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>  Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: Future  of RAT
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM,  Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> >>>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>   wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> I feel kind of the opposite  -- RAT is an important tool  that's
> >> required  of
> >>>>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely   integrated (at least in
> >> Java
> >>>>> land) outside  of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies.
> >> To  me,
> >>>>> that's a big scope and an important  community,  and just based on the
> >>>>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP  to  me.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Quick, hire him for chair  ;-)
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> --
> >>>> I Am What I Am  And That's All  What I Yam  (Popeye)
> >>>> 
> >>>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>  To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>  For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >>>  For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >>  For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> 
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris  Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory  Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:     http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct  Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern  California, Los Angeles, CA 90089  USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 


      

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
>> Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
>>
>> Who are the users of/community for RAT?  If that can be determined  
>> then the
>> TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT  
>> itself.
>>
>> eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the  
>> TLP
>> internal.apache.org.  RAT then just happens to be the first such  
>> "internal"
>> tool.   If other tools for the same community are written, then  
>> they would
>> also go into this TLP.
>
> While I'm not against what you propose at all, I don't think it  
> makes sense
> to use the graduation of RAT in isolation as a vehicle for your  
> proposal
> above. If such a proposal makes sense (after time of seeing more and  
> more
> "internal" Apache tools), then it would make sense to put it forward  
> at that
> time.
>
> In the meanwhile, there is an actionable, concrete proposal here I  
> believe
> for a RAT TLP. +1 to Greg's comments: every TLP doesn't have to be a
> behemoth pseudo-Incubator like many of our other TLPs. Some of them  
> work
> just fine as smaller, driven projects with communities of all sizes.

I'd suggest letting the RAT PPMC decide what they want to do. If they  
are unable to come to a decision, they can come back and ask for more  
opinions.

Craig
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 August 2010 18:20, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS  
>>> size" ?
>>>
>>> Answer: nowhere.
>>>
>>> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
>>> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
>>> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
>>> They have other concerns and focus points.
>>>
>>> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum  
>>> size"
>>> to justify their existence.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -g
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>  
>>> wrote:
>>>> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big  
>>>> enough to
>>> justify
>>>> an own TLP.
>>>> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit  
>>>> under the
>>> maven
>>>> TLP.
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's
>>> required of
>>>>>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at  
>>>>>> least in
>>> Java
>>>>>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF  
>>>>>> policies.
>>> To me,
>>>>>> that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based  
>>>>>> on the
>>>>>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> For  additional commands, e-mail: general- 
>>>>> help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Dan,

> Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
> 
> Who are the users of/community for RAT?  If that can be determined then the
> TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT itself.
> 
> eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the TLP
> internal.apache.org.  RAT then just happens to be the first such "internal"
> tool.   If other tools for the same community are written, then they would
> also go into this TLP.

While I'm not against what you propose at all, I don't think it makes sense
to use the graduation of RAT in isolation as a vehicle for your proposal
above. If such a proposal makes sense (after time of seeing more and more
"internal" Apache tools), then it would make sense to put it forward at that
time.

In the meanwhile, there is an actionable, concrete proposal here I believe
for a RAT TLP. +1 to Greg's comments: every TLP doesn't have to be a
behemoth pseudo-Incubator like many of our other TLPs. Some of them work
just fine as smaller, driven projects with communities of all sizes.

Cheers,
Chris

> 
> 
> 
> On 10 August 2010 18:20, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?
>> 
>> Answer: nowhere.
>> 
>> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
>> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
>> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
>> They have other concerns and focus points.
>> 
>> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
>> to justify their existence.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> -g
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to
>> justify
>>> an own TLP.
>>> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the
>> maven
>>> TLP.
>>> 
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's
>> required of
>>>>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at least in
>> Java
>>>>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies.
>> To me,
>>>>> that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based on the
>>>>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
>>>> 
>>>> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Dan,

> Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
> 
> Who are the users of/community for RAT?  If that can be determined then the
> TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT itself.
> 
> eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the TLP
> internal.apache.org.  RAT then just happens to be the first such "internal"
> tool.   If other tools for the same community are written, then they would
> also go into this TLP.

While I'm not against what you propose at all, I don't think it makes sense
to use the graduation of RAT in isolation as a vehicle for your proposal
above. If such a proposal makes sense (after time of seeing more and more
"internal" Apache tools), then it would make sense to put it forward at that
time.

In the meanwhile, there is an actionable, concrete proposal here I believe
for a RAT TLP. +1 to Greg's comments: every TLP doesn't have to be a
behemoth pseudo-Incubator like many of our other TLPs. Some of them work
just fine as smaller, driven projects with communities of all sizes.

Cheers,
Chris

> 
> 
> 
> On 10 August 2010 18:20, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?
>> 
>> Answer: nowhere.
>> 
>> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
>> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
>> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
>> They have other concerns and focus points.
>> 
>> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
>> to justify their existence.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> -g
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to
>> justify
>>> an own TLP.
>>> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the
>> maven
>>> TLP.
>>> 
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's
>> required of
>>>>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at least in
>> Java
>>>>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies.
>> To me,
>>>>> that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based on the
>>>>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
>>>> 
>>>> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[dan haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>]

Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.

Who are the users of/community for RAT?  If that can be determined then the
TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT itself.

eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the TLP
internal.apache.org.  RAT then just happens to be the first such "internal"
tool.   If other tools for the same community are written, then they would
also go into this TLP.

just my 2c.
-- Dan



On 10 August 2010 18:20, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?
>
> Answer: nowhere.
>
> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
> They have other concerns and focus points.
>
> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> to justify their existence.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> > RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to
> justify
> > an own TLP.
> > It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the
> maven
> > TLP.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
> >> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> >> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
> >>
> >> > I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's
> required of
> >> > all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at least in
> Java
> >> > land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies.
> To me,
> >> > that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based on the
> >> > telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
> >>
> >> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Future of RAT

[Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>]

While I second that in general, and I have argued (unsuccessfully) on  
the incubator list against arbitrary size constraints for graduating  
podlings, still in theory a PMC min size comes from the need to have a  
sustainable quorum to vote on releases. If it can get at least 3  
people to vote, it should be fine.

Otherwise +1 - one size does not fit all and Apache should (and does)  
accommodate different size projects.

Andrus


On Aug 10, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Greg Stein wrote:

> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?
>
> Answer: nowhere.
>
> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
> They have other concerns and focus points.
>
> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> to justify their existence.
>
> Cheers,
> -g


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 15:30, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
>>> [...]
>>> So yes, development activity is low.
>>>
>>> OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
>>> fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
>>> necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
>>> preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.
>>
>> Right. it is being properly managed.
>>
>> Just like the Apache Tcl TLP. And Apache Excalibur. And Apache Perl.
>> ... could probably find a few more low-activity TLPs, but I believe
>> you see my point. It isn't about activity either. It is about whether
>> you have eyeballs on the community and the codebase.
>
> Right. And if RAT is thinking about taking the next out of the Incubator
> (i.e., graduation there are only 2 options):
>
> * graduate into a TLP
> * graduate into a sub-project of another TLP
>
> IMHO, graduation by its nature means that the community/project are capable
> of self-governance and trained in "the Apache way". I think RAT fits that
> bill. My concerns about RAT being a sub project of Apache Foo is that we add
> more sub-projects to Apache Foo. Though by itself this doesn't indicate
> "umbrella", I've seen a movement towards establishing TLPs so that those
> doing the work can sit on the PMC, have binding votes on releases, etc.
> Adding RAT to Apache Foo may lead to Apache Foo PMC members holding the
> binding votes, which I'm not sure is a) good, or b) something that
> elucidates self-governance.

Exactly why I've been advocating graduation to its own TLP, despite
its "size" or "activity".

Cheers,
-g

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>]

I'd be willing to help out with a RAT TLP.  We're using it in our normal
build process for OpenJPA, Geronimo and Bean Validation, so helping out
on future votes is the least I can do.

-Donald


On 8/12/10 5:52 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>>
>>>> The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
>>>
>>> [absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
>>>
>>>> My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
>>>> not being able to get 3 PMC votes.
>>>
>>> I understand that and share the concern to some degree.
>>>
>>> RAT has probably never been the primary project for any of its
>>> contributors.  Most of us jumped in to scratch specific itches and other
>>> than that RAT is a side project somewhere down the list of projects we
>>> contribute to regularly.  Pretty far down.
>>>
>>> That being said, we are aware of the problem and have tried to address
>>> that by adding four more committers last December, that doesn't seem to
>>> have been enough.
>>>
>>> One reason probably is that RAT does what it is supposed to do well
>>> enough for most of us - the feedback of people who said RAT was so
>>> important to them that it should become a TLP indicates it is good
>>> enough for most other people as well.  In a way RAT has already been
>>> mature and in maintenance mode when it entered incubation.
>>>
>>> So yes, development activity is low.
>>>
>>> OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
>>> fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
>>> necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
>>> preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.
>>
>> Right. it is being properly managed.
>>
>> Just like the Apache Tcl TLP. And Apache Excalibur. And Apache Perl.
>> ... could probably find a few more low-activity TLPs, but I believe
>> you see my point. It isn't about activity either. It is about whether
>> you have eyeballs on the community and the codebase.
> 
> Clearly then there are small TLPs that operate effectively. However
> any TLP that can't get 3 PMC votes is effectively dead and I don't
> want to see RAT end up in that situation in a year or two. Seeing only
> 3 votes on the RAT 0.7 release from its PPMC raises that concern.
> 
> Niall
> 
> 
>> Cheers,
>> -g
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Niall,

On 8/12/10 2:52 AM, "Niall Pemberton" <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Clearly then there are small TLPs that operate effectively. However
> any TLP that can't get 3 PMC votes is effectively dead and I don't
> want to see RAT end up in that situation in a year or two. Seeing only
> 3 votes on the RAT 0.7 release from its PPMC raises that concern.

I don't think RAT will end up that way at all, that's why new committers and
PMC members are elected to keep the community alive over time.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>
>>> The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
>>
>> [absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
>>
>>> My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
>>> not being able to get 3 PMC votes.
>>
>> I understand that and share the concern to some degree.
>>
>> RAT has probably never been the primary project for any of its
>> contributors.  Most of us jumped in to scratch specific itches and other
>> than that RAT is a side project somewhere down the list of projects we
>> contribute to regularly.  Pretty far down.
>>
>> That being said, we are aware of the problem and have tried to address
>> that by adding four more committers last December, that doesn't seem to
>> have been enough.
>>
>> One reason probably is that RAT does what it is supposed to do well
>> enough for most of us - the feedback of people who said RAT was so
>> important to them that it should become a TLP indicates it is good
>> enough for most other people as well.  In a way RAT has already been
>> mature and in maintenance mode when it entered incubation.
>>
>> So yes, development activity is low.
>>
>> OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
>> fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
>> necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
>> preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.
>
> Right. it is being properly managed.
>
> Just like the Apache Tcl TLP. And Apache Excalibur. And Apache Perl.
> ... could probably find a few more low-activity TLPs, but I believe
> you see my point. It isn't about activity either. It is about whether
> you have eyeballs on the community and the codebase.

Clearly then there are small TLPs that operate effectively. However
any TLP that can't get 3 PMC votes is effectively dead and I don't
want to see RAT end up in that situation in a year or two. Seeing only
3 votes on the RAT 0.7 release from its PPMC raises that concern.

Niall


> Cheers,
> -g

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Guys,

>> [...]
>> So yes, development activity is low.
>> 
>> OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
>> fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
>> necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
>> preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.
> 
> Right. it is being properly managed.
> 
> Just like the Apache Tcl TLP. And Apache Excalibur. And Apache Perl.
> ... could probably find a few more low-activity TLPs, but I believe
> you see my point. It isn't about activity either. It is about whether
> you have eyeballs on the community and the codebase.

Right. And if RAT is thinking about taking the next out of the Incubator
(i.e., graduation there are only 2 options):

* graduate into a TLP
* graduate into a sub-project of another TLP

IMHO, graduation by its nature means that the community/project are capable
of self-governance and trained in "the Apache way". I think RAT fits that
bill. My concerns about RAT being a sub project of Apache Foo is that we add
more sub-projects to Apache Foo. Though by itself this doesn't indicate
"umbrella", I've seen a movement towards establishing TLPs so that those
doing the work can sit on the PMC, have binding votes on releases, etc.
Adding RAT to Apache Foo may lead to Apache Foo PMC members holding the
binding votes, which I'm not sure is a) good, or b) something that
elucidates self-governance.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>
>> The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
>
> [absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
>
>> My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
>> not being able to get 3 PMC votes.
>
> I understand that and share the concern to some degree.
>
> RAT has probably never been the primary project for any of its
> contributors.  Most of us jumped in to scratch specific itches and other
> than that RAT is a side project somewhere down the list of projects we
> contribute to regularly.  Pretty far down.
>
> That being said, we are aware of the problem and have tried to address
> that by adding four more committers last December, that doesn't seem to
> have been enough.
>
> One reason probably is that RAT does what it is supposed to do well
> enough for most of us - the feedback of people who said RAT was so
> important to them that it should become a TLP indicates it is good
> enough for most other people as well.  In a way RAT has already been
> mature and in maintenance mode when it entered incubation.
>
> So yes, development activity is low.
>
> OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
> fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
> necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
> preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.

Right. it is being properly managed.

Just like the Apache Tcl TLP. And Apache Excalibur. And Apache Perl.
... could probably find a few more low-activity TLPs, but I believe
you see my point. It isn't about activity either. It is about whether
you have eyeballs on the community and the codebase.

Cheers,
-g

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:

> The real point though is not size - its *activity*.

[absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]

> My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
> not being able to get 3 PMC votes.

I understand that and share the concern to some degree.

RAT has probably never been the primary project for any of its
contributors.  Most of us jumped in to scratch specific itches and other
than that RAT is a side project somewhere down the list of projects we
contribute to regularly.  Pretty far down.

That being said, we are aware of the problem and have tried to address
that by adding four more committers last December, that doesn't seem to
have been enough.

One reason probably is that RAT does what it is supposed to do well
enough for most of us - the feedback of people who said RAT was so
important to them that it should become a TLP indicates it is good
enough for most other people as well.  In a way RAT has already been
mature and in maintenance mode when it entered incubation.

So yes, development activity is low.

OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?
>
> Answer: nowhere.
>
> Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
> and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
> developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
> They have other concerns and focus points.
>
> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> to justify their existence.

The real point though is not size - its *activity*. Take a look at the
recent vote for the RAT 0.7 release on the RAT dev list[1] - it only
managed to get 3 vote. I know commit stats are not everything but of
the 7 people who have committed on RAT trunk in the past year only 3
are in double figures. My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a
small step away from not being able to get 3 PMC votes.

Niall

[1] http://markmail.org/message/yoaxt3yeo2gb23rg

> Cheers,
> -g
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to justify
>> an own TLP.
>> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the maven
>> TLP.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>>
>>> > I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's required of
>>> > all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at least in Java
>>> > land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies. To me,
>>> > that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based on the
>>> > telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
>>>
>>> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi All,

> 
> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> to justify their existence.

+1.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi All,

> 
> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> to justify their existence.

+1.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>]

Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?

Answer: nowhere.

Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
They have other concerns and focus points.

TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
to justify their existence.

Cheers,
-g

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:37, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to justify
> an own TLP.
> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the maven
> TLP.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>
>> > I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's required of
>> > all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at least in Java
>> > land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies. To me,
>> > that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based on the
>> > telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
>>
>> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>]

RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to justify 
an own TLP.
It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the maven 
TLP.

LieGrue,
strub


----- Original Message ----
> From: Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 4:47:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
> 
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
> 
> > I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool  that's required of
> > all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely  integrated (at least in Java
> > land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to  help check ASF policies. To me,
> > that's a big scope and an important  community, and just based on the
> > telltale signs it seems like a TLP to  me.
> 
> Quick, hire him for chair ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I Am What I Am  And That's All What I Yam  (Popeye)
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To  unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For  additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 


      

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<ch...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

Quick, hire him for chair ;-)



-- 
I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana
<sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
>> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.
>>
>
> RAT is a superb tool and its not only for ASF. In WSO2 we have now started
> to use RAT on releases .. still early stage (and RAT is finding lots of
> issues) but the plan is to incorporate it into the nightly build process so
> we catch issue early. I am certain RAT will keep growing to handle more
> complexity and scenarios and it makes sense for it to become its own thing.
>
> So totally +1 from me to going TLP.

same here.
+1 for TLP

>
> Sanjiva.
> --
> Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
> Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
> http://www.opensource.lk/
> Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> Director; Sahana Software Foundation; http://www.sahanafoundation.org/
> Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
>
> Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de>]

Torsten Curdt wrote:

>>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required
>>> of all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in
>>> Java land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF
>>> policies. To me, that's a big scope and an important community, and just
>>> based on the telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.
>>>
>>
>> RAT is a superb tool and its not only for ASF. In WSO2 we have now
>> started to use RAT on releases .. still early stage (and RAT is finding
>> lots of issues) but the plan is to incorporate it into the nightly build
>> process so we catch issue early. I am certain RAT will keep growing to
>> handle more complexity and scenarios and it makes sense for it to become
>> its own thing.
>>
>> So totally +1 from me to going TLP.
> 
> I am also +1 for TLP. I don't see how RAT fits the Commons charter.

Same to me, +1 for TLP.

- Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>]

>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
>> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.
>>
>
> RAT is a superb tool and its not only for ASF. In WSO2 we have now started
> to use RAT on releases .. still early stage (and RAT is finding lots of
> issues) but the plan is to incorporate it into the nightly build process so
> we catch issue early. I am certain RAT will keep growing to handle more
> complexity and scenarios and it makes sense for it to become its own thing.
>
> So totally +1 from me to going TLP.

I am also +1 for TLP. I don't see how RAT fits the Commons charter.

cheers
--
Torsten

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana
<sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
>> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
>> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
>> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.
>>
>
> RAT is a superb tool and its not only for ASF. In WSO2 we have now started
> to use RAT on releases .. still early stage (and RAT is finding lots of
> issues) but the plan is to incorporate it into the nightly build process so
> we catch issue early. I am certain RAT will keep growing to handle more
> complexity and scenarios and it makes sense for it to become its own thing.
>
> So totally +1 from me to going TLP.

same here.
+1 for TLP

>
> Sanjiva.
> --
> Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
> Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
> http://www.opensource.lk/
> Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
> Director; Sahana Software Foundation; http://www.sahanafoundation.org/
> Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
>
> Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.
>

RAT is a superb tool and its not only for ASF. In WSO2 we have now started
to use RAT on releases .. still early stage (and RAT is finding lots of
issues) but the plan is to incorporate it into the nightly build process so
we catch issue early. I am certain RAT will keep growing to handle more
complexity and scenarios and it makes sense for it to become its own thing.

So totally +1 from me to going TLP.

Sanjiva.
-- 
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Director; Sahana Software Foundation; http://www.sahanafoundation.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/

Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/

Re: Future of RAT

[Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.
>

RAT is a superb tool and its not only for ASF. In WSO2 we have now started
to use RAT on releases .. still early stage (and RAT is finding lots of
issues) but the plan is to incorporate it into the nightly build process so
we catch issue early. I am certain RAT will keep growing to handle more
complexity and scenarios and it makes sense for it to become its own thing.

So totally +1 from me to going TLP.

Sanjiva.
-- 
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Director; Sahana Software Foundation; http://www.sahanafoundation.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/

Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/

Re: Future of RAT

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On Aug 10, 2010, at 7:03 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> Hi Stefan,
>
>>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why  
>>> not
>>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
>>
>> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at  
>> contains at
>> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well  
>> as a
>> bunch of former PMC chairs.
>
> Heh, that's what I was thinking.
>
>>
>> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.
>
> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's  
> required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least  
> in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies.  
> To me,
> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

First, congratulations to everyone who contributed to RAT during  
incubation, and especially to those who prepared a release in the  
incubator. That's a big deal.

As to becoming TLP, I agree. As long as the folks who contribute to  
RAT continue to take feedback and make releases I see no reason to  
deny them the opportunity to have a RAT TLP.

There's nothing that I can think of that says a small scope project  
cannot be a successful TLP.

In fact, the small scope helps in one regard: there's not much work  
involved in making board reports.

Craig
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On Aug 10, 2010, at 7:03 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> Hi Stefan,
>
>>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why  
>>> not
>>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
>>
>> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at  
>> contains at
>> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well  
>> as a
>> bunch of former PMC chairs.
>
> Heh, that's what I was thinking.
>
>>
>> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.
>
> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's  
> required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least  
> in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies.  
> To me,
> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

First, congratulations to everyone who contributed to RAT during  
incubation, and especially to those who prepared a release in the  
incubator. That's a big deal.

As to becoming TLP, I agree. As long as the folks who contribute to  
RAT continue to take feedback and make releases I see no reason to  
deny them the opportunity to have a RAT TLP.

There's nothing that I can think of that says a small scope project  
cannot be a successful TLP.

In fact, the small scope helps in one regard: there's not much work  
involved in making board reports.

Craig
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Re: Future of RAT

[Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>]

On Aug 10, 2010, at 7:03 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> Hi Stefan,
>
>>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why  
>>> not
>>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
>>
>> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at  
>> contains at
>> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well  
>> as a
>> bunch of former PMC chairs.
>
> Heh, that's what I was thinking.
>
>>
>> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.
>
> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's  
> required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least  
> in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies.  
> To me,
> that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
> telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

First, congratulations to everyone who contributed to RAT during  
incubation, and especially to those who prepared a release in the  
incubator. That's a big deal.

As to becoming TLP, I agree. As long as the folks who contribute to  
RAT continue to take feedback and make releases I see no reason to  
deny them the opportunity to have a RAT TLP.

There's nothing that I can think of that says a small scope project  
cannot be a successful TLP.

In fact, the small scope helps in one regard: there's not much work  
involved in making board reports.

Craig
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Stefan,

>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
> 
> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
> bunch of former PMC chairs.

Heh, that's what I was thinking.

> 
> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Stefan,

>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
> 
> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
> bunch of former PMC chairs.

Heh, that's what I was thinking.

> 
> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Stefan,

>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
> 
> Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
> bunch of former PMC chairs.

Heh, that's what I was thinking.

> 
> To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
that's a big scope and an important community, and just based on the
telltale signs it seems like a TLP to me.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Re: Future of RAT

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> anyone on the team that would be able to?

Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
bunch of former PMC chairs.

To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> anyone on the team that would be able to?

Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
bunch of former PMC chairs.

To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

Stefan

Re: Future of RAT

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> anyone on the team that would be able to?

Jochen has sure be joking here.  The team list he pointed at contains at
least two current PMC chairs (haven't checked too closely) as well as a
bunch of former PMC chairs.

To me RAT's scope feels too small for a TLP.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Jochen,

First off, congrats on even sending this email. I've often wondered by RAT is still lingering in the Incubator when it's been pretty much widely used for a long time, has a functional community, and keeps plugging forward with its mission. So, first off, +1 to getting out of the Incubator, and +1 to the excellent job you guys have done.

However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?

Cheers,
Chris



On 8/10/10 3:40 AM, "Jochen Wiedmann" <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
RAT report. :-)

IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
[1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
issue.

The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.

WDYT?

Jochen


[1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org




++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Re: Future of RAT

["Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Hi Jochen,

First off, congrats on even sending this email. I've often wondered by RAT is still lingering in the Incubator when it's been pretty much widely used for a long time, has a functional community, and keeps plugging forward with its mission. So, first off, +1 to getting out of the Incubator, and +1 to the excellent job you guys have done.

However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?

Cheers,
Chris



On 8/10/10 3:40 AM, "Jochen Wiedmann" <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
RAT report. :-)

IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
[1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
issue.

The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.

But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.

WDYT?

Jochen


[1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org




++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++