Greg Stein wrote:
[ damn, I hate reply-to... it totally horks cross-posting... adding
commons-dev back... ]
reply-to-all leaves commons-dev in there, at least for me. If reply-to
wasn't set, you'd still have to use reply-to-all. :)
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 08:57:57AM -0500, Michael A. Smith wrote:
Greg Stein wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 04:08:02PM -0500, Michael A. Smith wrote:
...
So, to clarify, committers on jakarta-commons voted for creating a
management body of the code within the jakarta-commons cvs repository.
Costin calls this the commons PMC, although the distinction should be
made that this is not a board-recognized PMC.
And to prevent confusion, I would highly suggest that the jakarta-commons
committers find and use a different name than "pmc". Otherwise, there will
always be a "to clarify" when talking about it :-)
Cheers,
-g
yeah, I know. I've tried to only refer to a "management body" or
"oversight board" or other generic terms to describe it rather than
overloading the PMC term and confusing everyone. Hopefully Costin will
start doing the same. :)
Somebody used the term SPMC (SubProject Management Committee). That
certainly helps to distinguish it.
yup. I'd agree with that. :)
[Since the time I wrote my note above] I just went and read the thread on
commons-dev that Costin started. It looks like the end result was "well,
let's defer this for now". Unless I missed something, this means that it
doesn't really matter what the name is... you guys aren't doing it :-)
yeah, I was going to mention that. Don't know why it didn't make it
into my mail.
I do want to point out one item that Costin wrote near the end of the
thread:
I don't know - if it is too complicated we'll need a simpler
solution. I hope we all realise that nobody can track all
the code commits and all the code in general, and sooner
or later an error can happen.
It is interesting to point out that if the commons-dev group has a hard time
monitoring all the activity, then how could the nine members of the Jakarta
PMC monitor all of Jakarta? Eesh... :-) I'd say that is one of the
motivators for "spinning out" projects from Jakarta -- provide each with a
PMC that is highly focused on just that project and provide it with the
legal umbrella/protection of the ASF.
Isn't that what this reorg thing is partially about? :)
Of course, I'm fearing the day that some J-C components may choose to move
to A-C. My commit review load is going to skyrocket :-(
:)
(but that can also be a signal that something ought to move to top-level;
something like the commons httpclient might be a good candidate for
spinning out of J-C and Jakarta altogether... *shrug*)
I've tried to encourage extremely active commons components, like
httpclient (our most active) and jelly (which is still in the sandbox),
to move themselves to a higher level, but since I'm not active on those
particular compmonents, I haven't been too vocal about it. When I say
"higher level," I'm referring to the Jakarta subproject level (rather
than a commons component), but that's only because I'm not sure I
understood the option of promoting to a new top level apache project.
Cheers,
-g
regards,
michael
--
Michael A. Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
