On 10/26/15 4:04 AM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote: > Hi folks, > > I basically agree here with Bernd > > * the project needs clean-up > * I think the idea is worthwhile > * having something similar to “grok” as a stand-alone package together with a > programmatic approach to build regexp could be the way to go > * there is no community around so I think GitHub is currently a better place > to see the project mature
There does seem to be some interest here in helping with the clean-up. Getting the code granted in its current state before we have a raft of Gitub contributors who have to grant little pieces of things makes IP clearance a little easier. I see no real downside to letting the cleanup happen in the Sandbox and the upside is we are more likely to build community here. Regarding the point about the code needing work, I am reminded of an observation once made by Stefano Mazzocchi: There are four possibilities when it comes to code being "open-sourced" - good code, good ideas; good code, bad ideas; bad code, good ideas; and bad code, bad ideas - the third one is the one that tends to work best. Honestly, the code looks pretty decent to me; but there is a lot to do to make it approachable and complete. And the ideas are certainly interesting. So why not get it cleanly granted, put it in the Sandbox and see what develops? Phil > > So I’m > > -0 > > for adding the project in its current state to Commons Sandbox > > Cheers, > > Siegfried Goeschl > > >> On 26 Oct 2015, at 00:12, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Bernd Eckenfels <e...@zusammenkunft.net> >> wrote: >> >>> Am Sun, 25 Oct 2015 15:58:28 -0700 >>> schrieb Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> On 10/25/15 3:53 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >>>>> Let's see, would we run this through the Apache Incubator or could >>>>> we simply run it through our Commons Sandbox and then up to Commons >>>>> itself? >>>> I think we can just start in the sandbox, following the Incubator IP >>>> clearance process as we have done before. I volunteered above to >>>> manage the IP clearance process and VOTE to accept. It seems like >>>> there is some interest here in working on it, so that qualifies for >>>> the Sandbox, IMO. >>> I think the project is in a pretty bad shape. I would prefer to wait >>> till it is overhauled and mavenized (I did not understand the >>> merge into ghpages, if this can be renamed to master and fix the broken >>> links in the README, that would be a start. I still havent seen any >>> sample of the Naomi syntax/power...) >>> >>> And from my POV that would be a precondition to see some commitment of >>> the original submitters. Why would we rush things? >>> >> It seems OK to put Naomi in the Sandbox and then let anyone hack on making >> it Mavenized, Common-ized and so on. Then we can all see and play with it >> better it would seem to me. >> >> Gary >> >> >>> Gruss >>> Bernd >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
