Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Stian If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator need be involved at all? Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)? Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be offered PMC membership On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the ASF? Rob On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: >The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF >(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a >temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting >Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is >caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls). > > >We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of >interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a >quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a >common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home >then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original >committers still involved). > > >However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the >other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache >community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has >currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and >"watching" the project). > >In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists. >(I know, I know...). > >(I mentioned gitlab.com ) > > >The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but >with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of >a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) > > >So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of >Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project? > >In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity >rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already >exist. > >In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC / >dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases? > >Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache >Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the >committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would >simply close. > >.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from >those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or >should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons? > > >See >http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917 >RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E >for the whole threads :) > > >-- Forwarded message -- >From: Stian Soiland-Reyes >Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06 >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF >To: Commons Developers List > > >Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the >Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still >"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise). > >No earlier project has gone through this route >(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the >deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of >Incubator PMC in this case. > >Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf >releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC >and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating"). > >As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while >being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway. > > > >On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt wrote: >>> There are several ASF projects in the >>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to >>>those >>> projects if you have concerns. >> >> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case? >> >> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come >> to Commons. >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > >-- >Stian Soiland-Reyes >Apache Taverna (incubating) >http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718 > >--
RE: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
I hear what Stian is saying about the noise in Commons. If the team feel its not going to work for them then the incubator might be the right route. IMHO there is no reason why you couldn't be sponsored by the commons PMC. You would still need the IPMC to clear releases but that means three IPMC +1 votes. I'm not sure when this became a requirement for an IPMC vote. It used to be that the IPMC was notified. I always ensured that the mentors all voted first (incidentally this is a good check point to see if mentors are still active). ASIDE: I strongly recommend a return to the original notification of a VOTE in progress. This is another example of unnecessary centralization of process in the IPMC. Control should be with the podlings and its mentors, oversight should be with the PMC. If anyone wants to respond to this make it a new thread please. Let's not distract from this conversation. I see no reason why your project can't come here, and can graduate to commons if that is what is desired. Ensure you have enough mentors (must be IPMC members, which means ASF members although I can think of a few people on RDF projects I would be happy to vote onto the IPMC if necessary) to get 3 +1 release votes and ensure they are strong enough to tell the IPMC to get out of the way (when appropriate). Ross Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rob Vesse<mailto:rve...@dotnetrdf.org> Sent: 1/20/2015 7:10 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org<mailto:general@incubator.apache.org> Subject: Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion? Stian If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator need be involved at all? Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)? Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be offered PMC membership On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the ASF? Rob On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: >The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF >(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a >temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting >Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is >caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls). > > >We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of >interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a >quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a >common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home >then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original >committers still involved). > > >However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the >other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache >community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has >currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and >"watching" the project). > >In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists. >(I know, I know...). > >(I mentioned gitlab.com ) > > >The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but >with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of >a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) > > >So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of >Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project? > >In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity >rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already >exist. > >In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC / >dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases? > >Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache >Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the >committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would >simply close. > >.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from >those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or >shoul
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
On 20/01/15 15:28, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) It did happened before: http://markmail.org/search/?q=list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.general+vote+graduate+subproject+commons -- Sergio Fernández Senior Researcher Knowledge and Media Technologies Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925 sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at http://www.salzburgresearch.at - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
On 20/01/15 16:08, Rob Vesse wrote: On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the ASF? Well, this question eventually came across because a collision with another project proposed to Apache Commons Sandbox, issue extensively discuss at GitHub: https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues/43 and it's what created all these discussion. In case we propose Commons RDF for incubation, the background will be properly discussed in the proposal. -- Sergio Fernández Senior Researcher Knowledge and Media Technologies Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925 sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at http://www.salzburgresearch.at - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Just because a lot of Apache committers are involved and could put things right into another project (or even propose a new TLP directly) doesn't mean it happens. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal was voted -1 in the incubator because it had many Apache folks already and didn't need to learn anything. Yet the project didn't move into Apache - perhaps because it didn't have any pressure or framework to go through the Incubator process? (It now lives semi-dormantly as an Apache Extras thing at https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/beanshell/ - I joined recently and it is slowly awakening :) ) I think the incubator should be open also for a group of experienced Apache folks - although their needs would be different, e.g. more of a focus on the project goals and growing their community, and not so much worry about IP issues, licenses and build/release procedures. On 20 January 2015 at 15:08, Rob Vesse wrote: > Stian > > If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or > containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self > contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator > need be involved at all? > > Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP > Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)? > > > Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing > community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking > point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd > likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such > time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be > offered PMC membership > > On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at > all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain > stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the > ASF? > > Rob > > On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: > >>The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF >>(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a >>temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting >>Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is >>caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls). >> >> >>We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of >>interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a >>quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a >>common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home >>then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original >>committers still involved). >> >> >>However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the >>other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache >>community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has >>currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and >>"watching" the project). >> >>In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists. >>(I know, I know...). >> >>(I mentioned gitlab.com ) >> >> >>The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but >>with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of >>a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) >> >> >>So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of >>Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project? >> >>In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity >>rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already >>exist. >> >>In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC / >>dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases? >> >>Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache >>Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the >>committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would >>simply close. >> >>.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from >>those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or >>should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons? >> >> >>See >>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917 >>RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E >>for the whole threads :) >> >> >>-- Forwarded message -- >>From: Stian Soiland-Reyes >>Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06 >>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF >>To: Commons Developers List >> >> >>Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the >>Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still >>"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise). >> >>No earlier project has gone through this route >>(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the >>dep
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
I agree that incoming codebase can go through the IP Clearance, and if the committers are already Commons folks (predominantly), and the only actual issue is the number of mails on the dev@, then I think that separate mailing list is fine, perhaps with the exception of not having a name related to the RDF component, perhaps design-in-progress@ or other indicator that a particular activity is happening there. Niclas On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Rob Vesse wrote: > Stian > > If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or > containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self > contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator > need be involved at all? > > Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP > Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)? > > > Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing > community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking > point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd > likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such > time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be > offered PMC membership > > On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at > all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain > stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the > ASF? > > Rob > > On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: > > >The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF > >(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a > >temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting > >Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is > >caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls). > > > > > >We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of > >interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a > >quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a > >common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home > >then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original > >committers still involved). > > > > > >However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the > >other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache > >community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has > >currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and > >"watching" the project). > > > >In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists. > >(I know, I know...). > > > >(I mentioned gitlab.com ) > > > > > >The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but > >with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of > >a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) > > > > > >So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of > >Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project? > > > >In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity > >rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already > >exist. > > > >In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC / > >dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases? > > > >Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache > >Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the > >committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would > >simply close. > > > >.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from > >those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or > >should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons? > > > > > >See > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917 > >RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >for the whole threads :) > > > > > >-- Forwarded message -- > >From: Stian Soiland-Reyes > >Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06 > >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF > >To: Commons Developers List > > > > > >Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the > >Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still > >"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise). > > > >No earlier project has gone through this route > >(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the > >deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of > >Incubator PMC in this case. > > > >Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf > >releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC > >and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating"). > > > >As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while > >being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway. > >
RE: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
It's not for the IPMC to decide commons policy. If they feel another mailing list is not appropriate that is their call. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Niclas Hedhman<mailto:nic...@hedhman.org> Sent: 1/20/2015 8:07 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org<mailto:general@incubator.apache.org> Subject: Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion? I agree that incoming codebase can go through the IP Clearance, and if the committers are already Commons folks (predominantly), and the only actual issue is the number of mails on the dev@, then I think that separate mailing list is fine, perhaps with the exception of not having a name related to the RDF component, perhaps design-in-progress@ or other indicator that a particular activity is happening there. Niclas On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Rob Vesse wrote: > Stian > > If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or > containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self > contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator > need be involved at all? > > Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP > Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)? > > > Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing > community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking > point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd > likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such > time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be > offered PMC membership > > On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at > all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain > stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the > ASF? > > Rob > > On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: > > >The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF > >(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a > >temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting > >Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is > >caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls). > > > > > >We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of > >interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a > >quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a > >common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home > >then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original > >committers still involved). > > > > > >However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the > >other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache > >community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has > >currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and > >"watching" the project). > > > >In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists. > >(I know, I know...). > > > >(I mentioned gitlab.com ) > > > > > >The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but > >with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of > >a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) > > > > > >So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of > >Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project? > > > >In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity > >rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already > >exist. > > > >In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC / > >dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases? > > > >Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache > >Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the > >committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would > >simply close. > > > >.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from > >those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or > >should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons? > > > > > >See > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917 > >RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >for the whole threads :) > > > > > >-- Forwarded message -- > >From
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Agreed The point that I was trying to make is that if those involved already understand the Apache Way going through Incubation for the sake of it seems a pointless exercise especially when the legal/IP aspects of things can be handled in other fashions. If you are in a position to simply contribute the code directly to the TLP you expect it to live under and the TLP in question is receptive to that then it is a viable option to consider. I'm not saying that Incubation shouldn't happen but that you should consider if it actually brings the project in question any tangible benefits. There seems to be an assumption that coming through the Incubator is the how you would grow the community but that activity is perfectly capable of happening in the context of a TLP. One of the key activities of the PMC should be to continually try and bring in new members of the community over time so that the project they are charged with managing does not stagnate. It's worth remembering that the Incubator itself does not provide much in the way of help in terms of growing communities since that is something that really only the incubating projects themselves can do. Rob On 20/01/2015 16:04, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: >Just because a lot of Apache committers are involved and could put >things right into another project (or even propose a new TLP directly) >doesn't mean it happens. > >https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal was voted -1 in >the incubator because it had many Apache folks already and didn't need >to learn anything. Yet the project didn't move into Apache - perhaps >because it didn't have any pressure or framework to go through the >Incubator process? > >(It now lives semi-dormantly as an Apache Extras thing at >https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/beanshell/ - I joined >recently and it is slowly awakening :) ) > > >I think the incubator should be open also for a group of experienced >Apache folks - although their needs would be different, e.g. more of a >focus on the project goals and growing their community, and not so >much worry about IP issues, licenses and build/release procedures. > > >On 20 January 2015 at 15:08, Rob Vesse wrote: >> Stian >> >> If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or >> containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small >>self >> contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator >> need be involved at all? >> >> Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP >> Clearance procedure >>(http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)? >> >> >> Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing >> community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking >> point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd >> likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such >> time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be >> offered PMC membership >> >> On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF >>at >> all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain >> stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the >> ASF? >> >> Rob >> >> On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote: >> >>>The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF >>>(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a >>>temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting >>>Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is >>>caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls). >>> >>> >>>We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of >>>interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a >>>quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a >>>common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home >>>then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original >>>committers still involved). >>> >>> >>>However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the >>>other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache >>>community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has >>>currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and >>>"watching" the project). >>> >>>In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists. >>>(I know, I know...). >>> >>>(I mentioned gitlab.com ) >>> >>> >>>The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but >>>with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of >>>a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before) >>> >>> >>>So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of >>>Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project? >>> >>>In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity >>>rather than the community or "A
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal was voted -1 in the incubator because it had many Apache folks already and didn't need to learn anything. Yet the project didn't move into Apache - perhaps because it didn't have any pressure or framework to go through the Incubator process? BeanShell got stuck because nobody had enough time and energy to invest on it after questions had been asked. A new "release" of BeanShell (for a generic use of the term, not an Apache Release) was uploaded in the tarball repository of OpenOffice dependencies and that's it. The reason is simply that people involved preferred to spend their time and energy in other ways. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org