I can't just snap my fingers and make it happen. Yes, I want to switch to the new voting rules, but we need buy in from the potential committers.
1) Establish list of commiters / voters 2) Vote on move to Jakarta / Apache 3) Vote on change of license and copyright 4) Discuss and vote on future directions Doesn't sound like this has to happen overnight. Also, the longer we show operating under Jakarta voting rules, the better it looks. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 8:24 AM Subject: Re: [Tapestry-developer] Tapestry @ Jakarta and/or Apache > > > > > > > > > >>Myself, Dion Gillard and others are interested in the proposal. Jakarta > >>has experienced rapid growth over the years and its felt some growing > >>pains. In order to rectify this new procedures are being put in place > >>and a "reorganization" of sorts is happening. Its my goal to work with > >>the project to gain acceptence within this environment, while insulating > >>Tapestry folks as much as possible from the issues surrounding it to > >>avoid any potential misunderstandings and frustration. Among things that > >>are on the table is the possibility of projects such as Tapestry > >>becoming top level ASF projects (meaning an equal level to Jakarta not a > >>subproject), but while you might want to keep a preference in the back > >>of your minds, I don't think it needs to be a key concern. > >> > >> > > > >I haven't been following this; I've always expected "Jakarta" to be the > >server-side Java projects and "xml.apache.org" to be XML projects (some in > >Java). I'm concerned that Tapestry at the top level will isolate Tapestry > >from the mindshare of Jakarta, leaving the project in not better situation > >than on SourceForge. > > > > > Not really. In the current climate, it is likely that other projects > from Jakarta will move. One that may move... > ever hear of Ant? ;-) Anyhow this shouldn't be a big concern, we'll > work together for whats best. > > >I would suggest that we start with this group, and follow a nomination > >process to add additional committers. Or you can assume I'm nominating the > >others. This is a subset of the list of committers on SF. Sorry if I'm > >underplaying anyone's contributions. > > > >Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I hear voices and do what they say. There's brocoli in my socks. > > > >Mind Bridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Vocal proponent, contributor of components and bug fixes, mentors on the > >mailing list frequently. > > > >Malcolm Edgar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Contributes components and mentors, created Tapestry component reference. > > > >Richard Lewis-Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Very long-time user, contributes bug fixes, mentors on the mailing list. > > > >Ming Fang, Neil Swinton and perhaps David Solis are other possibilities. > >Neil has mostly been active on the documentation side. Ming Fang and David > >have not been visibily active in a bit, but still seem to be involved. > > > > > You're going to have a lot of work to do on the documentation and making > your site kinda like the rest of > them (this can happen after you move over), so I would recommend that > maybe you tap Neil as well if he's > game. (Just a thought - of course you could nominate him and vote on it > later) > > > > > > >>2. Adopt Apache voting rules (http://httpd.apache.org/dev/guidelines.html) > >> > >> > > > >I think we've been pretty OK about discussing changes in advance, using a > >mixture of the Wiki and the mailing list. > > > >I'm holding off on some controversial changes (Tapestry Lite) until we go > >though the voting process for it, it looks like it'll require consensus > >approval since a few people are very negative on it. > > > > > > > Right what I'm telling you though is that you need to adapt the voting > rules now and start using them. > You need to do this now (get the vote process going). I wouldn't hold > off on it, I think that's > precisely the kind of thing for demonstrating the power of your > community and acceptance of the > meritocratic voting rules. (Ken, Dion -- your thoughts?) > > >>3. Vote on relicensing from LGPL to ASL > >>(http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt) which is an apache requirement. As > >>part of this process you need to contact any major contributors and ask > >>them if its okay. Keep that list handy. > >> > >> > > > >I don't think that'll be a problem. > > > > > So suggest it, vote on it, and do it. You need to do this before a > vote is called for acceptance or > you'll have next to no chance of acceptence. > > >>Implications: > >> > >>When you move to Apache the code becomes the property of the Apache > >>Software Foundation (for many reasons especially liability, etc). So > >>all major contributers must agree to that as well. (if they have not > >>assigned their copywright already as a condition of donating to the > >>project). > >> > >> > > > >All copyrights have been assigned to me (HLS), that's in the Contributor's > >Guide, and is a condition of donating code to Tapestry. So this should not > >be a problem. > > > >It does mean updating the copyright on ~500 source files! > > > > > I've been through this before. I did it with some perl scripts and I > think "PrettyPrinter" from jrefactory does this too. > > So I think you have a good chance of being accepted, just a little work > to do. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCon, November 18-21 in Las Vegas (supported by COMDEX), the only Apache event to be fully supported by the ASF. http://www.apachecon.com _______________________________________________ Tapestry-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-developer
