Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
Lets not store code in the wiki, but rather SVN. There's no control on a WIKI, so we have no clue what it is or really where it came from. As you know, we are being very careful about code pedigree for all sorts of good reasons. If you would like to get this code into SVN so others can start tweaking and playing, we should do that. 1) To get started, first look at the Authorized Contributor Questionnaire (ACQ) http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.html or http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.txt and fill out a copy, print it, and sign it. Fax to +1 203 665 6400 (that's my fax #). 2) Fill out an ICLA as required by part IV of the ACQ above http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt print it, and sign it. Fax to same number. Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Note that we are going to be testing the contribution process that we have thought out, so please be patient :) geir On Sep 16, 2005, at 3:47 PM, David Tanzer wrote: Ok, it took a little bit longer than I first expected, but now my proof-of-concept implementation of the component model I described is available in the wiki: http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/ComponentModelFunctionPointers I have also linked it from the harmony architecture page. It contains a mechanism for loading components and a basic versioning and dependency management mechanism. The test case loads two components, where one depends on the other. I'll add some more explanations to the wiki page when I have more time, hopefully at the weekend. I have made several assumptions about the directory structure, the coding conventions and the documentation conventions, we should maybe discuss this in a different thread. Regards, David. On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 17:27 +0100, Tim Ellison wrote: David Tanzer wrote: Since we already started to define some component interfaces I think we also should start thinking about a component model which loads / connects such components. Maybe there are also some existing solutions we might want to look at (I must confess I didn't really search yet). Agreed, plus managing the API itself to ensure forwards/backwards version compatibility. I guess a requirement for such a component manager would be that it can load and connect components at runtime and that the specific implementations which are loaded can be configured. It might also be good if the same component implementations can be linked at compile time (i.e. statically) which could have benefits on embedded platforms, but I'm not sure if we really need this. I'm assuming that you are speculating on component management beyond the platform support (i.e. DLL-hell). The java world is already on this path with the OSGi framework (e.g. Felix). It will require a non-trivial solution to ensure that the runtime flexibility does not incur an unacceptable runtime cost. Another requirement would be that the components can be written in different programming languages (i.e. C, C++, Java, ...). It isn't really a problem to solve this for C and C++, but can we also easily support other programming languages? A simple way to implement such a component model in C would be an approach similar to the one Tim Ellison described in [1] where he explains the structure of the J9 VM's portability library. I started writing a proof of concept implementation for this, and I'll add it to the wiki as soon as it's finished. I look forward to seeing the proof of concept. Were you thinking of introducing versioning and dependency management style functions? It would be interesting to have several such proof-of-concept implementations of component models which we can study and the decide which to use. We could even write import mechanisms for the different component models so they can import and use components from another model too (of course this would normally imply reduced performance). Regards, David. [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/ 200509.mbox/[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 -- METHODEN DER BEWEISFHRUNG -- WISCHWEG - METHODE Man wischt die entscheidenden Stellen des Beweises sofort nach dem Anschreiben wieder weg (rechts schreiben, links wischen). -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Lets not store code in the wiki, but rather SVN. There's no control on a WIKI, so we have no clue what it is or really where it came from. I totally agree with that, I just didn't know if I have SVN write access and how we structure the repository. I guess it would be good to set up a playground or sandbox where we can play around with prototypes like the one I've provided. As you know, we are being very careful about code pedigree for all sorts of good reasons. If you would like to get this code into SVN so others can start tweaking and playing, we should do that. 1) To get started, first look at the Authorized Contributor Questionnaire (ACQ) http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.html or http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.txt and fill out a copy, print it, and sign it. Fax to +1 203 665 6400 (that's my fax #). 2) Fill out an ICLA as required by part IV of the ACQ above http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt print it, and sign it. Fax to same number. I have sent both documents via snail mail to Apache Software Foundation 1901 Munsey Drive, Forest Hill, MD 21050-2747 U.S.A. should I still fax it to you anyway? Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Note that we are going to be testing the contribution process that we have thought out, so please be patient :) Sure, no problem. I just thought we should start talking about code rather than abstract ideas. Regards, David. geir On Sep 16, 2005, at 3:47 PM, David Tanzer wrote: [Snip]
Re: Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
On Sep 20, 2005, at 3:07 AM, David Tanzer wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Lets not store code in the wiki, but rather SVN. There's no control on a WIKI, so we have no clue what it is or really where it came from. I totally agree with that, I just didn't know if I have SVN write access and how we structure the repository. I guess it would be good to set up a playground or sandbox where we can play around with prototypes like the one I've provided. This will be a way to help work that out. As you know, we are being very careful about code pedigree for all sorts of good reasons. If you would like to get this code into SVN so others can start tweaking and playing, we should do that. 1) To get started, first look at the Authorized Contributor Questionnaire (ACQ) http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.html or http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.txt and fill out a copy, print it, and sign it. Fax to +1 203 665 6400 (that's my fax #). 2) Fill out an ICLA as required by part IV of the ACQ above http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt print it, and sign it. Fax to same number. I have sent both documents via snail mail to Apache Software Foundation 1901 Munsey Drive, Forest Hill, MD 21050-2747 U.S.A. should I still fax it to you anyway? Yes. Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Note that we are going to be testing the contribution process that we have thought out, so please be patient :) Sure, no problem. I just thought we should start talking about code rather than abstract ideas. That's perfect. Regards, David. geir On Sep 16, 2005, at 3:47 PM, David Tanzer wrote: [Snip] -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Geir, When folks have sent in their ACQ/ICLA, we should give them direct commit access (after maybe a VOTE on the ppmc list). I really don't like putting so many road blocks, what exactly are we waiting for? What roadblocks are you talking about? We certainly want a vote and not just make everyone who fills in paperwork a committer. I don't think we need a high bar to entry, but at least a patch, maybe? This is a good subject to discuss. *Any* bulk contribution - i.e. code created outside of the day to day flow of the project by committers should come into a JIRA so the contribution can be inspected and understood to be a clearly delineated contribution. We will be keeping a record of all such contributions. geir Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Thanks, dims -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
So let's do it then...Everyone interested should fill in their paperwork by end of the month. First week next month we can have a VOTE on the PPMC for each person based on their contributions so far. (Let each person state what they are bringing to the table as well if they haven't already). So by end of October we should have a roster of folks with commit privs who can then vote in the next set of committers (or as and when they want to). I really don't want to wait another 4 months and see that we are still in the same situation as we are in today. Thanks, dims On 9/20/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Geir, When folks have sent in their ACQ/ICLA, we should give them direct commit access (after maybe a VOTE on the ppmc list). I really don't like putting so many road blocks, what exactly are we waiting for? What roadblocks are you talking about? We certainly want a vote and not just make everyone who fills in paperwork a committer. I don't think we need a high bar to entry, but at least a patch, maybe? This is a good subject to discuss. *Any* bulk contribution - i.e. code created outside of the day to day flow of the project by committers should come into a JIRA so the contribution can be inspected and understood to be a clearly delineated contribution. We will be keeping a record of all such contributions. geir Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Thanks, dims -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
Re: Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:36 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: So let's do it then...Everyone interested should fill in their paperwork by end of the month. First week next month we can have a VOTE on the PPMC for each person based on their contributions so far. (Let each person state what they are bringing to the table as well if they haven't already). So by end of October we should have a roster of folks with commit privs who can then vote in the next set of committers (or as and when they want to). I really don't want to wait another 4 months and see that we are still in the same situation as we are in today. We won't be. I'll post another note outlining what I think we should do, and we can agree. geir Thanks, dims On 9/20/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Geir, When folks have sent in their ACQ/ICLA, we should give them direct commit access (after maybe a VOTE on the ppmc list). I really don't like putting so many road blocks, what exactly are we waiting for? What roadblocks are you talking about? We certainly want a vote and not just make everyone who fills in paperwork a committer. I don't think we need a high bar to entry, but at least a patch, maybe? This is a good subject to discuss. *Any* bulk contribution - i.e. code created outside of the day to day flow of the project by committers should come into a JIRA so the contribution can be inspected and understood to be a clearly delineated contribution. We will be keeping a record of all such contributions. geir Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Thanks, dims -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code into SVN, not the WIKI (Re: [arch] VMCore / Component Model)
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dude, It's catch 22. There weren't any legitimate committers (because there was no initial code base) at the beginning of the project to vote. Because of this, there needs to be a lower barrier of entry than a formal procedure. Having a barrier to entry isn't in conflict with a formal procedure. We are going to have a formal procedure because the code pedigree is critical for this project. Otherwise I might suggest a segment of the willing go off and create an initial codebase in a CVS/SVN somewhere that is more open and then submit it. For a project with no code this seems a bit officious. Let the likely people in (Mladen for instance is an apache committer in good standing who has plans to do something) and then let Darwin sort them out. Then they can vote in committers in the normal way. The project needs code!!! Rather than being officious, the goal should be to facillitate every means possible to make that happen. It will be messy and there will be serveral misdirections but thats what a repository is for. Forward momentum. This is clearly a position we all believe in - we need code. I'll remark in another summary message. geir -Andy Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Geir, When folks have sent in their ACQ/ICLA, we should give them direct commit access (after maybe a VOTE on the ppmc list). I really don't like putting so many road blocks, what exactly are we waiting for? What roadblocks are you talking about? We certainly want a vote and not just make everyone who fills in paperwork a committer. I don't think we need a high bar to entry, but at least a patch, maybe? This is a good subject to discuss. *Any* bulk contribution - i.e. code created outside of the day to day flow of the project by committers should come into a JIRA so the contribution can be inspected and understood to be a clearly delineated contribution. We will be keeping a record of all such contributions. geir Assuming that all is well with the ACQ, this means that we can accept the code you have put in the WIKI into SVN for people to start playing with. You will have to add the code to a JIRA entry for the project, so you can definitively offer it under the Apache license. Thanks, dims -- 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]
