"Michael A. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/10/2002 01:36:41 AM:
[snip] > > (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. Being a committer on both those projects, I feel that a) HttpClient needs a stable release first, and that b) Jelly is only in it's infancy, and needs to get a release or two under it's belt to iron out the packaging issues. Both are a good fit for the 'Jakarta Commons' model - embeddable, small, reusable libraries that other codebases find useful. I don't yet understand the advantages of being a top-level project. I've followed the discussions on ant-dev, but still haven't seen much. Mostly my *impressions* were that it boiled down to: a) Better visibility and b) Direct reporting to the board, and hence legal coverage. I'm not sure you get more visibility, from a java perspective, being jelly.apache.org versus jakarta.apache.org/jelly, and I'm not sure what advantage brings me yet. The obvious answer is that neither project is 'in scope' for Jakarta. -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Work: http://www.multitask.com.au Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
