Martin v.d.B., I spent a bit of time answering your various points. I've answered them below, but I think that's hiding the real question.
"What does Trinidad want to be when it grows up?" Where does the Trinidad community see future development going? Is the plan to simply finish debugging what's out there? Is the idea to add more components? Is the goal to become the "best" general purpose JSF component set? Or is there a more narrow focus on what it means to be "Trinidad"? I think either possiblity is good. Tobago shows that a narrow-focused JSF component set can be useful and successful. TLP makes good sense for a narrow-focused JSF component set. On the other hand, if Trinidad wants to be a (Dare I say "The"?) general purpose component set, then MyFaces community acceptance is probably a good target to hit. That's going to happen better as part of the MyFaces community rather than as an independent TLP. The ad-hoc approach taken thus far for Tomahawk leaves something to be desired in my opinion, so there's an opportunity available. I think the "Next Step" should be taken by considering "where do you want to go today." (Yes, I've got a warped sense of humor. It's late and I spent the day with the inlaws.) On 4/7/07, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just a disclaimer : this is not an attack on you personally or a statement the the MyFaces Project is broken, just like to prevent that it becomes broken :) Mike Kienenberger wrote: > I'm in favor of MyFaces for Trinidad. I would like to see Trinidad > as the basis for Tomahawk JSF 1.2. So in this sense you are saying that we just incubated Tomahawk for JSF 1.2 ?
What I said was that the developers of Tomahawk have expressed an interest in using Trinidad technology for Tomahawk for JSF 1.2. Tomahawk is a loose collection of generic components with very little tying the various components together. Some components are strong, and others are weak. Each was authored without much thought to how it fits in with the others, or how to provide for common functionality. That was not the case with Trinidad. Trinidad provides infrastructure for building components that Tomahawk does not. Just as the proposed RCF project uses Trinidad, Tomahawk could be made to use Trinidad. It could very well be that the best solution for Tomahawk for JSF 1.2 is to start with Trinidad and integrate into it those worthwhile pieces of Tomahawk for JSF 1.1. That's one way Tomahawk 2 developement could go, but it's certainly not the only way. It's a way that I personally favor, but I am only one of the MyFaces PMC members.
When Trinidad becomes TLP it is for them to decide if they want that to happen (based on your proposal), if they go to the MyFaces TLP, it is not just their call.
Yes.... That's why one is an autonomous TLP and one is a not-so-autonomous subproject. Yet ASF still has subprojects coming in from incubation, so autonomy must not be the only consideration used. When Trinidad applied for incubation, they sought out and received sponsorship by MyFaces. At least at the time of entry into incubation, the Trinidad community felt there were advantages to being part of the MyFaces community. There's benefit to being part of a wider community, especially when you're a small project. Trinidad has a lot to offer. Only three of the Trinidad committers are not already actively involved in MyFaces Tomahawk, so there's not only functional overlap, but community overlap.
Which in the end (you gave an example of that) will end up in not a decision being made at all.
That's pretty cynical. I gave an example of an incompatible technology being made into a subproject and little attempt being made on either side to try to resolve the incompatiblities. Tobago isn't only incompatible with Tomahawk. It's incompatible with every JSF component set, including Trinidad. Trinidad isn't fundementally incompatible with Tomahawk -- if there are areas where the two don't work well together, there's no reason to think that these cannot be resolved.. Furthermore, developers on both projects have expressed strong interest in resolving any problem areas. I think what the Tobago example does show is that, if anything, MyFaces is possibly too willing to let subprojects govern themselves if the subproject has no interest in integrating with the "mainstream" MyFaces community. Your message implies (to me) that you think Trinidad may be losing the ability to have meaningful management of the code they are working on if they join MyFaces -- I don't see that being the case. I hope no one sees this as some kind of power trip where MyFaces or me personally is trying to "assimulate" Trinidad into the Myfaces "Collective." I've made it a point to not "pile on" into the JSF incubating project initial committer lists. I've tried to help out here and there, but I'm not actually using Trinidad yet myself (my primary client will not be converting to Java 1.5 for another couple of months which somewhat limits my practical involvement up to this point :-) When I suggest that Trinidad will benefit by being part of the greater MyFaces community, that's really what I mean :-) I think the converse is also true.
If you think the Tomahawk developers / community have more in common than with the MyFaces developers, you should probably join Trinidad ;). Not the other way around..
Well, up to this point, MyFaces Core & MyFaces Trinidad community has been primarily one-and-the-same. That said, there's certainly an argument that can be made that MyFaces should consider splitting into an implementation project and a component set project(s). A lot of effort has been put into making the two independent of each other. If it's a matter of one project merging into the other, however, I think it probably makes more sense for Trinidad to join MyFaces and not MyFaces to join Trinidad :-)
> However, if there is no interest in merging Tomahawk and Trinidad, > then going with a TLP would be better. Even if there is interest, a TLP would not prevent a merge of the two, unless Trinidad doesn't want to or the MyFaces PMC doesn't want to. If all Tomahawk developers would like to merge with Trinidad and Trinidad wants to and the MyFaces PMC doesn't, there are other issues :)
Well, we're not schizophrenic at MyFaces yet, so we're still "other issue" free :-) It's true that a TLP won't make any technical difference. However, trying to join two communities is harder than splitting an existing community. [Tobago status discussion dropped -- not really revelent or solvable here]
