It seems like the timing sort of makes sense now. We still have to get approval from tapestry-dev and any other sort of entities, but I don't see why anyone would be against it.
The thing is that I don't want to have to manage the process of doing it. There are also a few additional items I'm not sure about:
-) We don't want this looking like a tacos only sort of thing, there are a lot of other people developing cool tapestry components. We should try and get these people involved in the process as well. (Esp Ron Piterman)
-) Someone needs to sit down and think about how this sub-project should look in tapestry :) Just spin contrib off into it's own project? (If that's the case we should probably kill off the unused contrib components as well)
-) We can't move the new DatePicker into apache as that widget is LGPL. The component is still very useful though. Do we leave it here in tacos along with other items we can't put on apache for one reason or another?
-) What do we do about commit access? As much as I love what we have going here, as well as the ability of other component developers for tapestry I'm not thrilled with the idea that we can't control commit access on a project level. How do other projects do this? Is this sort of a gentlemans agreement where everyone knows more or less where they should and shouldn't be developing and only stray off the path if they really feel comforatable with it? How do other apache projects handle this? (Like maven? )
--
Jesse Kuhnert
Tacos/Tapestry, team member/developer
Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind.
- [Tacos-devel] are we ready to move to apache yet? Jesse Kuhnert
