Transcontinental flights are great to catch up on stuff.
On Nov 10, 2003, at 6:18 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 10 Nov 2003, at 22:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 05:15 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 10 Nov 2003, at 21:05, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
<snip>
Now oversight is another issue entirely, but one that is fixable. If moving projects from j-c to a-c solves the oversight problem, then whatever magic happens when a j-c gets to a-c could easily be applied to jakarta's PMC, right?
i'm not sure that it can.
for a few months now, i've been subscribed to most of the jakarta sub-project mailing lists. it started out with the mirroring but i stayed as an experiment (partly as a result of the constant criticism that the jakarta-pmc receives). last week my email client died. i've spent all last week rebuilding a new IMAP server and transferring my (very precious) email onto it. i still think that it's possible to supervise something as big as jakarta - but only just. i don't spend very much time coding now :(
You aren't the only one that supposed to supervise.
we're all suppose to supervise everything - we're certainly responsible for everything. subscription is an interesting experiment and is quite informative.
Before we had representation of every Jakarta subproject on the PMC, we organized it so that there were one or more people on the PMC assigned to watch subprojects. We don't need that with full project rep on the PMC, but you are of course welcome to cover all if you have the time. As you are probably starting to realize, that doesn't scale :)
though i do strongly feel that the criticism of jakarta from the board has been unfair, i do think that there is a grain of truth in there. the official jakarta pmc is too small and has far too few active members for a project the size of jakarta. but jakarta's got too big and too diffuse for this to change easily or quickly.
Oh, not at all. I think that by adding more members to the PMC, we'll solve the problem. The board, the directors of the corporation, have assigned responsibility to the PMC. I can't see why that precludes organizing the PMC as we see fit if it provides the oversight needed. After all, isn't that the approach being taken in A-C?
there are major issues about getting more folks on the jakarta pmc. at the moment, there are *major* procedure difficulties that are preventing our newly elected being officially recognized by the board as well as social ones. it is going to take time to reach our goal.
What are the difficulties?
some procedural, some social. jakarta doesn't even have a proper rule for deciding when an election succeeds. i've lost one election vote already for a senior apache member. then there's the effort of persuading people to accept the nomination.
whatever the issues, the membership has stayed basically static whilst i've been a member even though numerous election votes have been passed.
Well, we can fix that. I think that more process isn't the answer - just making it clear and streamlined.
<snip>
of course, some folks may see an ulterior motive. it will mean fewer product that i - and the rest of the jakarta pmc - are responsible for. (which may even free up some coding time :) but i really do think that there are products who need this move so that they can progress.
I keep hearing that, but as a PMC member myself, I don't see where it's inhibiting progress.
there are lots of committers in jakarta-commons who have IMHO proved themselves worthy for election to the jakarta pmc. but it's going to be a very, very long time before this will happen.
the flatter structure should mean that the goal of better supervision will be achieved for the products that move to apache commons quicker than we can achieve it for jakarta as a whole.
Don't you need the same amount of PMC members?
Why not just free j-c to be a TLP if it wants to?
wouldn't bother me but IIRC we've been around this particular territory before and the general opinion was that there doesn't seem to be much point having a separate language-specific jakarta commons top level project when there's already an apache commons project.
This is getting to be like some kind of Monty Python gag. I can't decide if it's the Spanish Inquisition or Life of Brian. <thinking/> It's Life of Brian :
"What have the romans done for us???"
"well, there are actual mature codebases in j-c."
"And there's active new ones too! People joining all the time, suggesting new stuff."
"Don't forget the strong community."
"Oh, and before the recognition and confidence by the rest of the Java community was developed, no one talked to us."
"And our history! Don't forget our history..."
"Right! Aside from the active and mature codebases, the community, the history, the links to other Jakarta sub-projects and the recognition in the Java community, what have the Romans done for us?"
<sorry :D I couldn't resist...>
there's also the issue of whether the jakarta-commons community wants to become top level. there are certainly some who do but i suspect that most want things to stay as they are. i might be able to persuade a few components to move (and so gaining some momentum for a move that way) but persuading the whole of jakarta-commons to move is certainly beyond me.
This is the bit that bugs me. Why should we be persuading anyone to do anything? I'll support and help move people out if they want to move out, I'll support A-C by trying to start/bring non-Java things there if I can and help some other way if I have no code to offer. But I'm not going to start trying to get people to move, especially with weird marketing like "You'll still be part of Jakarta but you won't be!"
i don't really see the problem with coorperating with greg and justin here.
<sigh>
What does cooperation mean? As an ASF member, I support having the A-C project. As a developer that works in multiple languages and environments, I'll bring code there and use what's there if needed. As a Jakarta PMC member, I'll support any codebase/community that wants to move out of Jakarta and fix what we can with our project. As a Jakarta community member? I disagree that we need save the village by destroying it. It's not just a yea/nay thing for me.
geir
i have a feeling the pretty soon (given a sufficent influx of jakarta-commons components), the community atmosphere of jakarta-commons will infuse this place too - but with the added advantage that i get to bug greg and justin with the questions about licensing and so on that i get asked but can't answer ;)
- robert
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
