FWIW, I'd like to change my vote to +1. The existence of a Apache Commons project devoted to Java doesn't automatically preclude the future existence of an Apache Ruby Commons or Apache .NET Commons. After all, the project names are only labels. Should another application for a TLP Commons be made, my hope would be that our Java commons would be predisposed to sharing the host name with our fellow volunteers, should such a request be made.
-Ted. On 5/10/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/8/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ ] +1 I support the proposal > [ ] +0 I don't care > [x] -1 I'm opposed to the proposal because... I do not feel the draft resolution adequately addresses several remarks made in the discussion thread. The resolution should address issues raised as to the scope of the PMC and the use of the commons namespace. Comments on the other thread included remarks like * "We'll do whatever the community wants to do. If someone proposes a Ruby library and we have a community interested in creating and supporting a Ruby library, then it would of course be strongly considered. " and * "Multiple PMCs, one website. So we'd have Java Commons, Ruby Commons, BobsYourUncle Commons PMCs, and they'd all share a commons.apache.org website." But, as it stands, the resolution implies that the proposed PMC will be excluded to Java and would own both the top-level "Commons" project name and the "commons.apache.org" namespace. Neither remark is addressed. If we are open to a TLP "Ruby Commons" or "DotNet Commons", then we should reflect that openness in the resolution and in the project name. We can't use "Java" (been there, Sun complained). But we can preserve the Jakarta name, and leave the door open for an top-level Apache XML Commons or a top-level Apache C# Commons. So why not the "Apache Jakarta Commons Project"? Or, if we intend that this PMC provide oversight for components in other languages later, then we should strike the word "Java" from the resolution now, and clarify our intent. Time is not of the essence, and I believe we should define the scope of the PMC and the "commons.apache.org" host name and namespace now, rather than create FUD later. It took five hundred email messages to create the commons in the first place, and we can spare a few more to get the TLP resolution right. My suggestion is to * amend the Project name to "Apache Jakarta Commons PMC". and setup shop as commons.apache.org/jakarta Let the focus of this PMC remain on Java, but, in the Apache spirit of openness and collaboration, make way for other Apache Commons projects in other languages. -Ted.
-- HTH, Ted <http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
