About a year ago, the PMC co-opted the General list for it ongoing meetings. Since then, it's been used for both general interest discussions, like what's up with Linus or Microsoft, along with the general business of running Jakarta.
It's possible that we may need to create a discussion list for the off-topic threads, since as you point out, the list is required (for PMC members at least). Personally, with the exception of Jon's candid remarks, I think the noise-to-signal ratio is relatively low. I recognize the amount of work Jon does around here, and, personally, I forgive him those. (Though we may need to put the link to Jon's self-deprecating page < http://jakarta.apache.org/site/jon.html > on the footer of the General mails ;-) There is a distinct need for better, more easily maintained documentation, so that the things we do decide don't get buried on the list. I tried to use the Jyve FAQ for a time, but there were reliability problems, and the URLs are long http://nagoya.apache.org:8080/jyve-faq/Turbine/screen/DisplayTopics/action/SetAll/project_id/2/faq_id/38 At this point, I'm reconciled to do more work on the Jakata site using XML in the old-fashioned way. We have some unratified guidelines that expand on the ones (you?) originally set down. http://jakarta.apache.org/site/proposal.html If you were able to review them, I would of course very much like to have your comments before making a final update and calling for a vote. I would also like to add more rationale for some of the guidelines. The recent dicussion regarding coding conventions had less to do with the conventions themselves, and more to do with why we even have conventions. (And having conventions, why don't we enforce them.) As Jakarta grows, it becomes more and more important that we have better ways to introduce peoole into the fold. Right now, there is a tendency to make someone a Committer and let them find their own way around. At this time, I'd like to go to work on a Committer's guidebook that would help explain how things are done (starting with How to do a Release -- which raised the JAR discussion the other day). I think the real solution to improving the noise:signal ratio is to move away from the "oral (email)" tradition we have now, and move back toward providing more grassroots documentation, as you did in the "preamble" to the original constition. http://java.apache.org/main/constitution.html An actual history of Jakarta might also be useful to give people a better perspective. Here's one passages I tucked away (to be joined by your own snippets of late). Pier to Jon - Thu, 21 Dec 2000 > We've traveled a long > way together, from my very first steps in open-source land in January 1998, > to our marvelous meeting at the first ApacheCON in October 1998, the Jakarta > room meeting, all JavaONEs, and all we did together to bring this project > where it is right now. Pier again, same day > And we, as the newly formed Apache Software Foundation, accepted that code > in donation as a point of start for the Jakarta Project. I was there, in > that meeting room, that day when we outlined how the process would have > evolved, with Jon, Stefano and Brian. And I was there, on stage at JavaONE, > when Patricia Sueltz announced the spinoff of the project againg with Jon, > Stefano and Brian. If that has been a wrong decision, we four are the people > to blame... A coherent history might help with many of the questions about why we do things the way we do. (Or why we don't do some things at all.) I think clearly documenting the Apache Way would be an important first step to unifying the Apache Projects. I would also like to personally commend Jon with his efforts to better document Jakarta. He has put a lot into the Web site (probably 90%), and we all owe him a great debt. -Ted. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
