Hi,
on behalf of the Apache RAT team, I'd like to announce the
availability of Apache RAT 0.7. This is a feature release with several
bug fixes and minor improvements over its predecessor, Apache RAT 0.6.
An upgrade is recommended. For details on Apache RAT, see
http://incubator.apache.org/rat
Hi,
having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
time to time, and s
Forgot one possible issue: Currently, RAT has its own mailing lists,
which would be unusual for Commons. My personal choice would be to
leave this as it is, but that's of course also subject to discussion.
Jochen
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just pub
Hi Jochen,
not sure if Commons is the right place sine RAT has a very spezialized
scope or to state it differently I would not look for RAT in Commons.
What about Maven TLP?
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
On 10.08.10 12:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Hi,
having just published a release of Apache R
How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
an "eat your own dog food" type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)
...ant
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Sie
On 10/08/2010 12:48, ant elder wrote:
How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
an "eat your own dog food" type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)
I near
On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:
> How about keeping it here at the Incubator?
I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
podling. But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
Infra would be fine with me if infra wanted to absorb rat.
Stefan
---
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:
>
>> How about keeping it here at the Incubator?
>
> I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
> podling. But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
> Infra would
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
> The occasional fea
Hi Jochen,
First off, congrats on even sending this email. I've often wondered by RAT is
still lingering in the Incubator when it's been pretty much widely used for a
long time, has a functional community, and keeps plugging forward with its
mission. So, first off, +1 to getting out of the Incu
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a
> RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the
> team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used
On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
> anyone on the team that would be able to?
Jochen has sure be joking here. The team list he pointed at c
Hi Stefan,
>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not
>> have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
>> anyone on the team that would be able to?
>
> Jochen has sure be joking here. The team list he pointed at contains at
> least two curren
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to help check ASF policies. To me,
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:58, ant elder wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>
>> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have
>> a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on
>> the team that wou
On Aug 10, 2010, at 7:03 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
Hi Stefan,
However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why
not
have a RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing
anyone on the team that would be able to?
Jochen has sure be joking here. Th
RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough to justify
an own TLP.
It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under the maven
TLP.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message
> From: Jochen Wiedmann
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, Au
On 2010-08-10, Mark Struberg wrote:
> RAT is very important and helpful, but I don't think it's big enough
> to justify an own TLP.
> It previously was under codehaus and I agree it would best fit under
> the maven TLP.
RAT > RAT Maven Plugin. RAT initially was developed at Google Code.
Stefan
Let me repeat: where does it say a TLP must be "at least THIS size" ?
Answer: nowhere.
Small projects are just fine. We're looking at the overall community
and the people to shepherd that community. Those are the RAT
developers and users. Not the Apache Commons or Apache Maven people.
They have o
Hi All,
>
> TLPs are not "expensive", so they don't have to have a "minimum size"
> to justify their existence.
+1.
Cheers,
Chris
++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109
While I second that in general, and I have argued (unsuccessfully) on
the incubator list against arbitrary size constraints for graduating
podlings, still in theory a PMC min size comes from the need to have a
sustainable quorum to vote on releases. If it can get at least 3
people to vote,
Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
Who are the users of/community for RAT? If that can be determined then the
TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT itself.
eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the TLP
internal.apache.org. RAT then
Hi Dan,
> Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
>
> Who are the users of/community for RAT? If that can be determined then the
> TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT itself.
>
> eg, if RAT is deemed to be for "internal" apache use, then call the TLP
> interna
Hi!
Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?
If it is still ASF centric, then to me it sounds much more as a subproject of
infrastruct
On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
Hi Dan,
Perhaps this just needs generalizing a smidge.
Who are the users of/community for RAT? If that can be determined
then the
TLP should be named after this community, rather than after RAT
itself.
eg, if RAT is deemed
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
>
> WDYT?
I agree with others who've said RAT should consider going TLP.
-Rahul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional command
I'm +1 for TLP. No need to start creating more umbrella projects. If
finding a chair is troublesome, I'd be more than willing to fill that
gap (although I'm not on the RAT ppmc, nor have written a single line
of code for it). As a mentor and user I love the utility, so keeping
it around and making
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 06:40, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
>...
> WDYT?
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 15:26, Craig L Russell wrote:
>...
> I'd suggest letting the RAT PPMC decide what they want to do. If they are
> unable to come to a decision, they can come back and ask for more opinions.
They asked for
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 15:25, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
> to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
> for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?
>
> If it is still ASF centric,
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Maybe I need to catch up with the current status: is RAT still mainly targeted
> to ASF projects, or is it a general Release Audit Tool and as such also useful
> for releasing GPLed or BSL style projects?
Unfortunately, there is no clear re
Thanks Jochen!
The reason for this question was: If RAT is really a generic tool, then
becoming
a TLP is imo a valuable option.
Otoh if RAT is hand tailored for ASF internal needs only, then it's really an
internal project and as such imo doesn't justify the TLP step and should rather
aim to b
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integrated (at least in Java
> land) outside of the Incubator as a tool to
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 07:00
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; rat-...@incubator.apache.org;
> d...@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Future of RAT
>
> On 2010-08-10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>
> >
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> If
> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
> important part in the process.
There's also an SPDX spec coming to describe the licensing in
pro
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Joe gets to
rewrite it in Perl. Hey, that's not a
On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in its development?
If it goes under infra (as some are pushing for), then Jo
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 22:43, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in i
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
wrote:
> On 8/10/2010 10:39 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> It is *very* true that Infra, Legal, and (all?) ASF PMCs will be
>>> clients/users of the tool. But are they interested in
38 matches
Mail list logo
