Re: [project policy] Author credit and attribution
On Oct 2, 2005, at 12:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I prefer them. I've never had any of the problems that happened in Avalon or other projects in any project I've been involved in. Author tags do not signify ownership, they signify "I wuz here". They are also a principle reason that a lot of newbies get involved in open source because they can point potential employers to look at code that they wrote (I know a few of this). Sure, but not having an author tag doesn't take that away. I really like them for newbies, but I also have no empirical evidence that people contribute more eagerly with an author tag... They also make it WAY more convienient to say "Hey andy why did you do this dumb thing here?" rather than have to figure out who did that dumb thing. Author tags don't actually solve that either when there are more than one author. You still have to go look at the log. I do recommend omitting email addresses as those just help spammers and tend to create useless name change commits. I'm also the most guilty offender of forgetting to include my @author tag on projects that require it :-) They are very seductive, but I think can be a negative in the long term. Being aggressive on recognizing the contributions on the contributor page and AUTHOR files should balance the somewhat debatable theory about newbies. geir -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Might as well do this, now that we are getting in code by the bucketful. One of the fundamental notions of an Apache project is the notion of community ownership - that this is _our_ project, collectively. However, this collective project is composed of significant individual contributions, contributions which we want to recognize. So the problem we have to solve is how to balance these two ideas. The Apache Board has recommended that projects not employ author tags in their source code. The main motivation for this recommendation is to remove "territorial ownership" from code. I've worked in projects that did it, and some that didn't. When tags were there, I think it gave people a chance to 'sign' their work, and I'll be the first to admit that when I did my first- ever commit that had my name on it, I was proud! It's a natural thing to be proud of our work. The flip side was that I've seen it lead to people believing they "own" a piece of code because of the tags, I've seen "keeping up with the joneses" where every contributor adds an author tag, no matter what, leading to strange feelings about what is the level that makes on an "author" For example, reformatting w/ eclipse? When we started Geronimo, we decided to not use author tags, and we've never looked back - it just didn't matter. Now, if you look around the foundation codebases, there are author tags historically, and some projects just chose to ignore the recommendation and use them. My preference is to not have them here in Apache Harmony, but that said, I want to make sure that contributors are recognized for both general participation as well as significant 'bulk' contributions. To solve that, I can think of two things offhand : 1) We should have a page like the HTTP project (you know, the "Apache webserver") http://httpd.apache.org/contributors/ where we have a list of our committers and their ongoing activities, and a section noting the contributions that the project accepted. 2) In order to get attribution closer to the code, we could also have an "AUTHORS" file per module, so that we'd easily know who is working on what - if you are a committer working on a module, you'd add your name to the list. Additionally, if there was a bulk contribution that seeded a module (like the three contribs we have now), we can have a note about that at the top of the AUTHORS file such as "ArchieVM originally contributed by Archie Cobbs" (yeah, I know we aren't calling it ArchieVM...) or something like that. Thoughts? geir -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [project policy] Author credit and attribution
I prefer them. I've never had any of the problems that happened in Avalon or other projects in any project I've been involved in. Author tags do not signify ownership, they signify "I wuz here". They are also a principle reason that a lot of newbies get involved in open source because they can point potential employers to look at code that they wrote (I know a few of this). They also make it WAY more convienient to say "Hey andy why did you do this dumb thing here?" rather than have to figure out who did that dumb thing. I do recommend omitting email addresses as those just help spammers and tend to create useless name change commits. I'm also the most guilty offender of forgetting to include my @author tag on projects that require it :-) -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Might as well do this, now that we are getting in code by the bucketful. One of the fundamental notions of an Apache project is the notion of community ownership - that this is _our_ project, collectively. However, this collective project is composed of significant individual contributions, contributions which we want to recognize. So the problem we have to solve is how to balance these two ideas. The Apache Board has recommended that projects not employ author tags in their source code. The main motivation for this recommendation is to remove "territorial ownership" from code. I've worked in projects that did it, and some that didn't. When tags were there, I think it gave people a chance to 'sign' their work, and I'll be the first to admit that when I did my first-ever commit that had my name on it, I was proud! It's a natural thing to be proud of our work. The flip side was that I've seen it lead to people believing they "own" a piece of code because of the tags, I've seen "keeping up with the joneses" where every contributor adds an author tag, no matter what, leading to strange feelings about what is the level that makes on an "author" For example, reformatting w/ eclipse? When we started Geronimo, we decided to not use author tags, and we've never looked back - it just didn't matter. Now, if you look around the foundation codebases, there are author tags historically, and some projects just chose to ignore the recommendation and use them. My preference is to not have them here in Apache Harmony, but that said, I want to make sure that contributors are recognized for both general participation as well as significant 'bulk' contributions. To solve that, I can think of two things offhand : 1) We should have a page like the HTTP project (you know, the "Apache webserver") http://httpd.apache.org/contributors/ where we have a list of our committers and their ongoing activities, and a section noting the contributions that the project accepted. 2) In order to get attribution closer to the code, we could also have an "AUTHORS" file per module, so that we'd easily know who is working on what - if you are a committer working on a module, you'd add your name to the list. Additionally, if there was a bulk contribution that seeded a module (like the three contribs we have now), we can have a note about that at the top of the AUTHORS file such as "ArchieVM originally contributed by Archie Cobbs" (yeah, I know we aren't calling it ArchieVM...) or something like that. Thoughts? geir -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed.
Re: RT: Escape analysis
Yeah I thunk it some time ago too. I think I even commented on that
one. I'd also like "descoping"
try -{
String myvar = "Hey";
}- catch {
System.out.println(myvar);
}
System.out.println(myvar);
A principle reason for {} scoping is that it allows register allocation
; however, it is practically useless in the above. 9/10 you're going to
have to put "myvar" in at least method scope so that you can get at it
outside of the t/c. That defeats register allocation in many cases
anyhow. The above example is doofy but there are many cases when you're
getting a result back inside a t/c and want to save it...that makes you
predeclare it.
I'd also like to be able to opt out of checked exceptions such that they
are autowrapped at runtime exceptions. I agree with Microsoft on that
one. It took me awhile...but checked exceptions do more harm than good.
If anyone's interested I'll look up my more comprehensive list that I
had of VM/Java "wishes" for JDK 6.
-andy
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
My friend Cameron has been thinking about this too. (I call Brian a
friend as well...)
http://www.jroller.com/page/cpurdy?entry=threading_and_escape_analysis
On Oct 1, 2005, at 11:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275.html -
Yummy.
[project policy] Author credit and attribution
Might as well do this, now that we are getting in code by the bucketful. One of the fundamental notions of an Apache project is the notion of community ownership - that this is _our_ project, collectively. However, this collective project is composed of significant individual contributions, contributions which we want to recognize. So the problem we have to solve is how to balance these two ideas. The Apache Board has recommended that projects not employ author tags in their source code. The main motivation for this recommendation is to remove "territorial ownership" from code. I've worked in projects that did it, and some that didn't. When tags were there, I think it gave people a chance to 'sign' their work, and I'll be the first to admit that when I did my first-ever commit that had my name on it, I was proud! It's a natural thing to be proud of our work. The flip side was that I've seen it lead to people believing they "own" a piece of code because of the tags, I've seen "keeping up with the joneses" where every contributor adds an author tag, no matter what, leading to strange feelings about what is the level that makes on an "author" For example, reformatting w/ eclipse? When we started Geronimo, we decided to not use author tags, and we've never looked back - it just didn't matter. Now, if you look around the foundation codebases, there are author tags historically, and some projects just chose to ignore the recommendation and use them. My preference is to not have them here in Apache Harmony, but that said, I want to make sure that contributors are recognized for both general participation as well as significant 'bulk' contributions. To solve that, I can think of two things offhand : 1) We should have a page like the HTTP project (you know, the "Apache webserver") http://httpd.apache.org/contributors/ where we have a list of our committers and their ongoing activities, and a section noting the contributions that the project accepted. 2) In order to get attribution closer to the code, we could also have an "AUTHORS" file per module, so that we'd easily know who is working on what - if you are a committer working on a module, you'd add your name to the list. Additionally, if there was a bulk contribution that seeded a module (like the three contribs we have now), we can have a note about that at the top of the AUTHORS file such as "ArchieVM originally contributed by Archie Cobbs" (yeah, I know we aren't calling it ArchieVM...) or something like that. Thoughts? geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RT: Escape analysis
My friend Cameron has been thinking about this too. (I call Brian a friend as well...) http://www.jroller.com/page/cpurdy?entry=threading_and_escape_analysis On Oct 1, 2005, at 11:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275.html - Yummy. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RT: Escape analysis
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275.html - Yummy.
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
On Oct 1, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Tim Ellison wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Oct 1, 2005, at 3:42 PM, Tim Ellison wrote: Sorry, I wasn't referring to the mechanics of voting, but rather what was being implied by the response from people on the list. For example, I'd definitely +1 for getting relevant code in as seed for the project, So did you? :D Well, no ;-) because I didn't understand exactly what approval was being solicited. So, to clarify : do you think we should bring Archie's contribution to the sandbox for people to work with? :) [ ] +1 Yes, I think that's great! [ ] -1 No, reason : so hearing about an incoming VM implementation or interface design is excellent. I guess that the PPMC are uniquely in a position to ensure that 'bulk' contributions have the paperwork in order (ref the contribution policy on the website). Yes. (And I'll update the policy docs to reflect better how things are working later this weekend...) I've been looking through SVN, and now that I can see the completed contrib_checklist for these pioneers I have a better understanding of how this works; i.e. the community acceptance comes after the PPMC have done a number of verifications. Actually, no. You were looking at David Tanzer's. (although I do have the docs from Archie as well...) I was thinking that we'd vote before pounding out the paperwork so we don't make people go through the papework if the community doesn't want it, but I'm changing my mind and would happily have the Authorized Contributor Questionnaire as well as the Bulk Contribution Checklist accepted by the PPMC before asking for a vote, because then people will be sure that the basic safeguards we want to have for exposure are in place. Nothing stops someone from posting things to our JIRA, but the [vote] compels the community to download and examine the work to see how it fits, and by having the ACQ and BCC in place, they can be reasonably comfortable that we're doing our collective job on this aspect. geir Regards, Tim Again, not implying that this is wrong or anything, just learning. Regards, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones you might have. -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK. -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > On Oct 1, 2005, at 3:42 PM, Tim Ellison wrote: > >> Sorry, I wasn't referring to the mechanics of voting, but rather what >> was being implied by the response from people on the list. >> >> For example, I'd definitely +1 for getting relevant code in as seed for >> the project, > > > So did you? :D Well, no ;-) because I didn't understand exactly what approval was being solicited. >> so hearing about an incoming VM implementation or interface >> design is excellent. I guess that the PPMC are uniquely in a position >> to ensure that 'bulk' contributions have the paperwork in order (ref the >> contribution policy on the website). > > > Yes. (And I'll update the policy docs to reflect better how things are > working later this weekend...) I've been looking through SVN, and now that I can see the completed contrib_checklist for these pioneers I have a better understanding of how this works; i.e. the community acceptance comes after the PPMC have done a number of verifications. Regards, Tim >> >> Again, not implying that this is wrong or anything, just learning. >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may >>> be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in >>> Kindergarten. :-) >>> >>> I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make >>> counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants >>> discussion >>> yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones >>> you might have. >>> >>> -Andy >>> >>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >>> >>> That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > Tim Ellison wrote: > > >> Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what >> does +1 >> mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the >> scope >> of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation >> (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on >> file? >> Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a >> first-pass >> IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net >> is in >> place too. >> Regards, >> Tim >> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >> >> >>> +1 from me >>> >>> I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement >>> found >>> in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it >>> being >>> his original work based on exposure to only open-source >>> implementations >>> is fine for me. >>> >>> This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue >>> about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. >>> >>> On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> > > > -- > Andrew C. Oliver > SuperLink Software, Inc. > > Java to Excel using POI > http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi > Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. > > > >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >> IBM Java technology centre, UK. >> >> > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
On Oct 1, 2005, at 3:42 PM, Tim Ellison wrote: Sorry, I wasn't referring to the mechanics of voting, but rather what was being implied by the response from people on the list. For example, I'd definitely +1 for getting relevant code in as seed for the project, So did you? :D so hearing about an incoming VM implementation or interface design is excellent. I guess that the PPMC are uniquely in a position to ensure that 'bulk' contributions have the paperwork in order (ref the contribution policy on the website). Yes. (And I'll update the policy docs to reflect better how things are working later this weekend...) Again, not implying that this is wrong or anything, just learning. Regards, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones you might have. -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
Sorry, I wasn't referring to the mechanics of voting, but rather what was being implied by the response from people on the list. For example, I'd definitely +1 for getting relevant code in as seed for the project, so hearing about an incoming VM implementation or interface design is excellent. I guess that the PPMC are uniquely in a position to ensure that 'bulk' contributions have the paperwork in order (ref the contribution policy on the website). Again, not implying that this is wrong or anything, just learning. Regards, Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may > be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) > > I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make > counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion > yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones > you might have. > > -Andy > > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >> That's good background. >> >> If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ >> harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. >> >> (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are >> much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) >> >> geir >> >> On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html >>> >>> Tim Ellison wrote: >>> Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > +1 from me > > I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement > found > in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it > being > his original work based on exposure to only open-source > implementations > is fine for me. > > This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue > about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. > > On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > >> Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache >> License to >> Apache Harmony. It can be found here : >> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 >> >> [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox >> [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : >> >> This vote will close 72 hours from now. >> >> geir >> >> -- >> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> > > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Andrew C. Oliver >>> SuperLink Software, Inc. >>> >>> Java to Excel using POI >>> http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi >>> Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. >>> >>> >> > > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
On Oct 1, 2005, at 1:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) There is no "authoritative source" - projects get to choose the manner in which they run themselves, as that document itself says. Certainly what we do will capture the spirit and for the most part, the letter, of that document, but as I said, it notes that communities have flexibility. Okay. Yeah in the future I'll reply with the link to the "guidelines" document. I suggest that the sandbox be generally commit then review than review then commit with the caveat of "be considerate of others" when making changes. Agreed. I think that even outside of the sandbox, commit then review except when it's something weird, tricky, sensitive, etc - people can use their best judgement. IOW, "don't be a cowboy". I suspect that as we get much much further along (like v1.0), we may want a RthenC like http does for stable tree I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones you might have. Maybe I'm too old school and like a little upfront design to keep you out of trouble ;) BUFD, SDLC and CMM are all cuss words to me. I think that "a little upfront design" isn't quite what CMM is about. geir -andy geir -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: That's good background. If theres something to be added here http:// incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) There is no "authoritative source" - projects get to choose the manner in which they run themselves, as that document itself says. Certainly what we do will capture the spirit and for the most part, the letter, of that document, but as I said, it notes that communities have flexibility. Okay. Yeah in the future I'll reply with the link to the "guidelines" document. I suggest that the sandbox be generally commit then review than review then commit with the caveat of "be considerate of others" when making changes. I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones you might have. Maybe I'm too old school and like a little upfront design to keep you out of trouble ;) BUFD, SDLC and CMM are all cuss words to me. -andy geir -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed.
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) There is no "authoritative source" - projects get to choose the manner in which they run themselves, as that document itself says. Certainly what we do will capture the spirit and for the most part, the letter, of that document, but as I said, it notes that communities have flexibility. I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones you might have. Maybe I'm too old school and like a little upfront design to keep you out of trouble ;) geir -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
I think we should refer people to the authorative source, but that may be a general bias on my part due to a game I played in Kindergarten. :-) I share your opinion on fractional votes...they are annoying and make counting more difficult. However I don't think this warrants discussion yet. Late refactoring is good. Solve problems you have, not the ones you might have. -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed.
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
That's good background. If theres something to be added here http://incubator.apache.org/ harmony/guidelines.html, suggest it. (But I really want to avoid fractional votes. Written comments are much more expressive and avoid assumptions.) geir On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
See this http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Andrew C. Oliver SuperLink Software, Inc. Java to Excel using POI http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed.
This week on harmony-dev (Sept. 25 - Oct. 1 2005)
Archie Cobbs contributed a part of the JCVM to the project in the JIRA which might be called JCHE (JC Harmony Edition) within harmony. Andy Oliver tried to port it to OSX but had problems with the required packages. Santiago Gala, Stefano Mazzocchi, Archie Cobbs and Dalibor Topic tried to help, but Andy didn't get it running so far. [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Michael Koch asked in "How to package a contribution" if it's OK to dual-license a contribution (i.e. GPL and AL), Geir Magnusson Jr answered that he's free to do so and that he would encourage this to bring the communities together. [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] I have added my proof-of-concept component model to JIRA and later there was the vote "[vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-5 : David Tanzer's proof-of-concept component model" about it. It was accepted with 3 binding votes from the PPMC (geir, dims, stefano) and it can now be found in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/harmony/enhanced/trunk/sandbox/contribs/tanzer_component There where a total of 10x +1, 1x 0 and 1x -1 votes. [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] During this vote and a vote about the JCVM contribution some aspects of this voting process have been explained again. Everybody should vote because the opinion of the whole community is important, "but the binding votes are the PPMC while in incubation, and the PMC when out of incubation". A vote needs three binding +1 votes to be accepted (with no -1 votes). In this context "+1" means yes, "-1" means no and "0" means don't care. Geir Magnusson Jr. also clarified that in votes for code for the sandbox: "No one is going to reject contributions to the sandbox except for reasons of code provenance - i.e. 'Hey, that's Sun's source!' - or complete misalignment with project, such as someone donating an EJB container or something." [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] In the thread "[Arch] Class unloading and VM objects reclaim" Usman Bashir explained a model where every class loader manages his part of the memory. Archie Cobbs replied that this would work, but he asked what we would gain with this approach. There has been no answer yet. [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] The vote "[vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM" is currently running. Daniel Lydick has posted a "basic Java Virtual Machine entitled the 'Apache Harmony Bootstrap JVM.'" as a JIRA contribution. Mark Wielaard has sent in a report from the "GNU Classpath distro DevJam" telling us it was a great success (congrats!). [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, David. -- Read the archive of this series at http://deltalabs.at/ -- RSS feed: http://deltalabs.at/?q=taxonomy/term/8/0/feed -- Also aggregated at: http://planet.classpath.org/ -- David Tanzer, Haghofstr. 29, A-3352 St. Peter/Au, Austria/Europe http://deltalabs.at -- http://dev.guglhupf.net -- http://guglhupf.net My PGP Public Key: http://guglhupf.net/david/david.asc -- Pinky, Are You Pondering What I'm Pondering? Well, I think so Brain, but "apply North Pole" to what?
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
On Oct 1, 2005, at 8:44 AM, Tim Ellison wrote: Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- Generally +1 = yes, -1 = no, 0 = "don't care, but I'm telling you that because I'm paying attention". I hope we can avoid the +0, -0 stuff here. is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? No - it means people want to accept the contribution into the project. It's one step, and I think the first step. The rest of the material must be done before bringing in of course, but in general, I don't think there's any point in going through that first if then the project wouldn't want the contribution. So 1) we vote if we want the code 2) if so, it is brought into the SVN when documentation is complete, which is handled by the person from the PMC bringing it in Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first- pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Yes - there was a first pass sniff before the vote, in JIRA. I commented on it, Archie answered, and Andy also looked around a bit, so I feel comfortable moving forward. We have a few pieces of the safety net : 1) basic review in JIRA 2) set of agreements (ICLA, ASQ, BCC, etc) 3) brought into isolation in the contrib_archive for easy review at any point in future 4) in this case, brought into sandbox I don't think we'll be bringing into sandbox always, but maybe that formal "hop" of unpacking in sandbox and then moving it elswhere isn't a bad idea. Dunno. geir Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: +1 from me I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations is fine for me. This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : This vote will close 72 hours from now. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK. -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
Great to see this stuff coming in. Just for my education, what does +1 mean from people -- is it simply that the code 'fits' within the scope of the project? does it mean that the relevant documentation (authorized contrubutor questionnaire, ICLA, ?) is known to be on file? Your resolved concern below implies that you are also doing a first-pass IP sniff test, though I recognise that the sandboxing safety net is in place too. Regards, Tim Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > +1 from me > > I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement found > in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of it being > his original work based on exposure to only open-source implementations > is fine for me. > > This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue > about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. > > On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >> Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License to >> Apache Harmony. It can be found here : >> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 >> >> [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox >> [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : >> >> This vote will close 72 hours from now. >> >> geir >> >> -- >> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
DevJam reports
Hi all, The GNU Classpath distro DevJam was a great success. It seems we brought some harmony into the hearts and minds of the different distributions (Ubuntu, SkoleLinux, Debian, Fedora, Suse, Gentoo, OpenEmbedded) that participated. And being able to talk and debug some issues with several of the upstream projects involved (GNU Classpath, kaffe, gcj, Cacao) was definitely inspirational and productive. Here is a list of other summaries and notes of the meeting: - SkoleLinux summaries and pictures: http://skolelinux.de/wiki/FreeJava/Meeting050923 - OpenEmbedded ARM TODO list: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rwagner/pyblosxom.cgi/computers/freejava/gcj-on-arm.html - GCJ maintainer/Fedora impressions by Andrew Haley: http://www.advogato.org/person/aph/diary.html?start=0 - Gentoo DevJam braindump by Petteri Räty (plus presentation) http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.java/598 http://dev.gentoo.org/~betelgeuse/show.pdf - DevJam Arrival and Schedule/Discussion notes: http://gnu.wildebeest.org/diary/index.php?p=116 - Debian Project leader notes: http://necrotic.deadbeast.net/~branden/blog/exuberance/Debian/destination_oldenburg.html - LWN article about the meeting that is currently being published for subscribers (please support LWN it is a great magazine): http://lwn.net/Articles/153450/ Next week it will be free for all. (Please send me, or the devjam mailing-list, updates and additions.) On request of several of the participants I have setup a mailing-list so people can keep in touch and coordinate cross-distro/packaging/project things. If you are interested please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The mailing-list has a public archive accessible through: http://developer.classpath.org/mailman/listinfo/devjam And if you are interested in participating or helping out with a followup meeting please see the wiki about DevJam++: http://java.debian.net/index.php/DevJam++ Cheers, Mark -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-3 : Archie Cobbs' Contribution of JCVM
+1 (non-binding) On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 17:43 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > +1 from me > > I was concerned about the provenance given some of the statement > found in the contribution, but Archie's explanation and statement of > it being his original work based on exposure to only open-source > implementations is fine for me. > > This is going into the sandbox - if we happen to discover an issue > about this in the near future, we can simply fix it. > > On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > Archie Cobbs has offered the JCVM project under the Apache License > > to Apache Harmony. It can be found here : > > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3 > > > > [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project sandbox > > [ ] -1 Don't accept the code. Reason : > > > > This vote will close 72 hours from now. > > > > geir > > > > -- > > Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- David Tanzer, Haghofstr. 29, A-3352 St. Peter/Au, Austria/Europe http://deltalabs.at -- http://dev.guglhupf.net -- http://guglhupf.net My PGP Public Key: http://guglhupf.net/david/david.asc -- A large number of installed systems work by fiat. That is, they work by being declared to work. -- Anatol Holt signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
