Stephen McConnell wrote:
I've been through (most) of it in the last days. I know many people are supporting this move and I'm happy about it. That is not the point.Federico Barbieri wrote:Ths process has been initiated based on the the discussion here under the thread "Thoughts on an Avalon PMC".Stephen McConnell wrote:Stephen McConnell wrote:Federico Barbieri wrote:I would list each project that will be the initial foundation. fede
Fede :
Could you repost you question under a different thread.
I think discussion on things like charter, reorganization et. are healthy but its not part of the vote thread.
Woops - I posted a request and redirected the thread as well which was a little inconsistent of me.
I suggest we continue on this thread.
Let me start of with a rsponse which is based on the resolution currently under a vote:
* Avalon is the content currently assigned under the Jakarta Apache
Project Avalon sub-project
- the framework
- logkit
- excalibur
- pheonix
- avalon-apps
- cornerstone
* The proposed resolution calls for migration of this content and
rationalization.
There has already been discussion on this - mainly different throughts on the approach. But it is safe to say that the disucssion hasn't gone very deep at this stage. Cheers, Steve.
I thought there was a discussion going on about what should be avalon pmc responability and waht not. If so the options are:
A - to found the PMC you need to sign a liability form:
1 - you know which project will be avalon pmc and which commons or incubator *or*
2 - you sign for all avalon related projects. When you have a better picture of the organization you update the form as common and/or incubator takes resposability for what's moved there
B - you may have a PMC without signing anything so you can take your time to decide things and sign later.
I'm trying to clarify (to myself at least) the legal process involved.
I don't understand your disagreement... It could just be I'm digital and you're analog thou... :)I don't know if there is a choice between A and B. That was my only concern. Do you have details on this?Lets' assume for the moment that I may have a disagreement concerning the question.
:-)
Given the active engagement of lots of people both within and up the chain of responsibility, I thihk you will find that the process is completely in line with the Apache process for PMC formation. This is not to say that the work is done - because there is still much to do on the area of reorganization and my guess is that this isn't something we will agree on overnight. It will be much more a case of open deliberation and constructive attempts at the developoment of concensus on the subject. In parrallel, there are already activities in place to facilitiate the migration of some of the content of Avalon - in particular, some of the components in Excalibur are likely to kmore rapisdly to Commons and some of the applications in the Avalon Apps area already well into processes that would facilitate igration out of the Avalon.
My suggestion is to start discussing what should or should not be under the Avalon PMC, when and how. The sooner you decide this the better.
fede
Hope that helps.
Cheers, Steve.
p.s. Where have you been lately - havn't seen you around on Avalon for a long time?
SJM
fedeCheers, Steve.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
