Re: new Standard/JSTL subproject? [WAS Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin]
Henri Yandell wrote: are there any committers involved with JSTL around? Sorry, I raised the question then entered in JavaOne-sleep-mode :( if not, would anyone like to volunteer to sound them out about a move to subproject status? I vote for Standard being a separate Jakarta sub-project. I've mentioned the idea on the taglibs-dev mailing list, no reply as yet. There hasn't being too many messages by the committers lately, specially on votes. So, tomorrow (I'm too tired now :-) I will send a big message summarizing all of these pending votes and hopefully we will get enough committer answers now... -- Felipe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
new Standard/JSTL subproject? [WAS Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin]
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 20:14 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote: On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, robert burrell donkin wrote: On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 00:49 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote: Apache Wiki wrote: Please do not edit comments into this text: please use the CharterForWebCommonsRequestForComments or post to [http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html General At Jakarta]. OK, here I am posting :-) 3.What about the Standard Taglibs? Should it be part of this new project or should it be a separate project. The reasoning here is that, because that sub-project provide the codebase for JSTL's implementation (and maybe other JSR taglibs in the future as well, such as the Web Services taglib), its development activities/cycles might be different from the non-standard ones (we could even try to apply the TCK on such projects in the future, for instance). if the new subproject is anything like the commons then each component will have it's own development rhythm. it might be easier to raise extra hands when needed for these efforts if these share the same infrastructure (mailing lists, subproject organization and so on). opinions? My vote is for the active Taglibs to roll into the web component subproject, but for the Standard/JSTL taglib to move to Jakarta subproject status. Taglibs-user is dominated by JSTL questions and the JSTL committers don't have any obvious overlap with the other taglib committers (that I've noticed). Also in terms of codebase, Standard is the relative behemoth. Lastly it has a much higher profile than other parts of web-component-subproject will have and as a spec implementation it has a different set of issues to deal with. +1 are there any committers involved with JSTL around? if not, would anyone like to volunteer to sound them out about a move to subproject status? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: new Standard/JSTL subproject? [WAS Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin]
On 6/26/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: are there any committers involved with JSTL around? if not, would anyone like to volunteer to sound them out about a move to subproject status? I've mentioned the idea on the taglibs-dev mailing list, no reply as yet. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 00:49 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote: Apache Wiki wrote: Please do not edit comments into this text: please use the CharterForWebCommonsRequestForComments or post to [http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html General At Jakarta]. OK, here I am posting :-) I'd like to suggest 2 things: 1.We prefereably use Maven for the builds, as it helps a lot handling the dependencies (if we stick to Ant, we should at least use Ivy or M2 Ant stuff for dependency management). For instance, I haven't applied some patches to the Jakarta Taglibs because my computers are not set for building them anymore (and I don't have the time/patience to fix it). jakarta commons is agnostic (but uses maven for the website). i'd recommend official agnosticism with unofficial encouragement to maven. it is a good idea to provide ant scripts generated by maven in SVN. 2.Regarding the Jakarta Taglibs, we should create the new taglibs from scratch. I mean, of course we should reuse the code, but we better do some refactoring first (for instance, eliminating redundant taglibs, defining a role for TLD names, etc...) - the current Jakarta Taglibs would then be frozen in time. IMHO it would probably be more convenient to maintain these frozen taglibs (from an official perspective) within the new subproject. with subversion, it's really nice and easy to have cool directory structures... 3.What about the Standard Taglibs? Should it be part of this new project or should it be a separate project. The reasoning here is that, because that sub-project provide the codebase for JSTL's implementation (and maybe other JSR taglibs in the future as well, such as the Web Services taglib), its development activities/cycles might be different from the non-standard ones (we could even try to apply the TCK on such projects in the future, for instance). if the new subproject is anything like the commons then each component will have it's own development rhythm. it might be easier to raise extra hands when needed for these efforts if these share the same infrastructure (mailing lists, subproject organization and so on). opinions? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 00:52 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote: Felipe Leme wrote: I'd like to suggest 2 things: ... 3 Damn, beaten by the ENTER key again :-( shades of monty python's flying circus ;) - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
robert burrell donkin wrote: if the new subproject is anything like the commons then each component will have it's own development rhythm. I think this is a cogent point... if the idea is that this is like a Commons project, than I have to ask the question: why not just have a few new Commons projects, as was my original proposal? I originally started by suggesting a Commons Filters, because I had some filters I wanted to contribute. So far I think we've brainstormed something like 4-6 sort of sub-packages of this... If they are going to develop to their own rhythm as you say, then why not make each a Commons project, where there already largely is the infrastructure (in the larger sense) build up? That would seem to me the path of least (or at least lower) resistance, and maybe even a more appropriate fit. It's a question of what the vision is of course... if everyone is thinking along the commons lines anyway, why not just do it in Commons? Frank - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 17:55 -0400, Frank W. Zammetti wrote: robert burrell donkin wrote: if the new subproject is anything like the commons then each component will have it's own development rhythm. I think this is a cogent point... if the idea is that this is like a Commons project, than I have to ask the question: why not just have a few new Commons projects, as was my original proposal? The relevant questions are: * what percentage of the existing commons developers are interested in working on web components * what percentage of the prospective web developers are interested in participating in other commons projects * what percentage of users and interested in both web and normal commons projects. If the answer to any of these is high then the benefits of a combined community outweigh the nuisance of excessive emails, overly-large subproject lists and general distraction. I would guess the critical threshold to be about 25% - but I don't think that will be reached, ie I believe that less than 25% of existing commons committers would be interested in web commons components of the sort proposed. Therefore having such components in the existing commons will just annoy people without having any significant benefits (other than allowing this startup hassle for web commons to be skipped). Already we have people (both developers and users) agitating for separate per-component mail lists due to the volume of emails in commons. Some people have stated that they refuse to subscribe or be part of the community while there is a shared list. I would hate to see separate lists, but they have a point - there is an upper limit to the amount of mail people can handle (esp. people on dial-up connections; filtering by mail subject doesn't reduce the bandwidth needed to download all the mails). There is also the issue of community size. Commons has a couple of dozen regular committers, which means we all recognise each other's names. That's quite important I think, and brings some sense of team membership. Diluting this with another dozen developers (I hope web commons will grow to that size!) may change that sense of community (esp. if we don't have many interests in common). And likewise for new web commons committers - I think the sense of a team will be stronger with a separate project/mail-list etc. I admit it's all guesswork and a little crystal-ball-gazing. If web-commons is a failure, ie only a couple of projects get off the ground, then the existing commons would be a better home. But I hope that's not the case - there does seem to be a reasonable number of ideas and people willing to push them forward. Regards, Simon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, robert burrell donkin wrote: On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 00:49 -0300, Felipe Leme wrote: Apache Wiki wrote: Please do not edit comments into this text: please use the CharterForWebCommonsRequestForComments or post to [http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html General At Jakarta]. OK, here I am posting :-) 3.What about the Standard Taglibs? Should it be part of this new project or should it be a separate project. The reasoning here is that, because that sub-project provide the codebase for JSTL's implementation (and maybe other JSR taglibs in the future as well, such as the Web Services taglib), its development activities/cycles might be different from the non-standard ones (we could even try to apply the TCK on such projects in the future, for instance). if the new subproject is anything like the commons then each component will have it's own development rhythm. it might be easier to raise extra hands when needed for these efforts if these share the same infrastructure (mailing lists, subproject organization and so on). opinions? My vote is for the active Taglibs to roll into the web component subproject, but for the Standard/JSTL taglib to move to Jakarta subproject status. Taglibs-user is dominated by JSTL questions and the JSTL committers don't have any obvious overlap with the other taglib committers (that I've noticed). Also in terms of codebase, Standard is the relative behemoth. Lastly it has a much higher profile than other parts of web-component-subproject will have and as a spec implementation it has a different set of issues to deal with. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
Apache Wiki wrote: Please do not edit comments into this text: please use the CharterForWebCommonsRequestForComments or post to [http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html General At Jakarta]. OK, here I am posting :-) I'd like to suggest 2 things: 1.We prefereably use Maven for the builds, as it helps a lot handling the dependencies (if we stick to Ant, we should at least use Ivy or M2 Ant stuff for dependency management). For instance, I haven't applied some patches to the Jakarta Taglibs because my computers are not set for building them anymore (and I don't have the time/patience to fix it). 2.Regarding the Jakarta Taglibs, we should create the new taglibs from scratch. I mean, of course we should reuse the code, but we better do some refactoring first (for instance, eliminating redundant taglibs, defining a role for TLD names, etc...) - the current Jakarta Taglibs would then be frozen in time. 3.What about the Standard Taglibs? Should it be part of this new project or should it be a separate project. The reasoning here is that, because that sub-project provide the codebase for JSTL's implementation (and maybe other JSR taglibs in the future as well, such as the Web Services taglib), its development activities/cycles might be different from the non-standard ones (we could even try to apply the TCK on such projects in the future, for instance). -- Felipe - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Jakarta Wiki] Update of DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons by RobertBurrellDonkin
Felipe Leme wrote: I'd like to suggest 2 things: ... 3 Damn, beaten by the ENTER key again :-( - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
