cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reinhard Pötz <>
Subject Re: [proposal] Corona: A Cocoon subproject
Date Sun, 20 Jul 2008 12:17:22 GMT
David Crossley wrote:
> Reinhard P?tz wrote:
>> Dear Cocoon PMC,
>> as I said in a separate thread recently, it's time for Corona to move 
>> out of the whiteboard of Cocoon in order to increase its visibility and 
>> to allow releases. Corona has reached a state where it is already useful 
>> but there is a lot of room for others to enhance and improve it.
>> So far Corona has been developed by Steven and me (+ some additions by 
>> Carsten recently) which doesn't qualify for being a diverse community. 
> By my standards, all the people who have helped to
> discuss it are part of the community.
>> In order to change this I want to propose Corona to become a subproject 
>> of Cocoon under the oversight of the Cocoon PMC.
>> For that purpose I think that it would be a good idea to follow the
>> procedure of the Incubator and nominate at least 2 additional PMC
>> members who help us to grow the community and do all the legal checks 
>> when Corona is released (I'd love to see a alpha-1 release this summer.)
>> Therefore I kindly want to ask two other Cocoon PMC members to
>> become mentors for Corona and help to get it going.
> I don't see the need. Cocoon PMC are the mentors
> and have oversight. Anyone, including non-PMC,
> can speak up at any time.

The two problems that my proposal tries to solve is that if nobody 
speaks up and if nobody feels responsible.

>> I also propose that Corona is being moved to
>> The initial set of
>> committers should consist of Carsten, Steven and me - every Cocoon 
>> committer can get write access by simply asking for it on this list.
> I would prefer that all Cocoon committers have
> default commit ability.

When I look at an opensource project it's important for me to find out 
the number of _active_ committers. By implication that means that I want 
to be honest with all (potential) users and also be clear about the 
number of people who have contributed code and about their affiliations.

This could be easily achieved by starting with a fresh list of 
committers. And for all the existing Cocoon committers it shouldn't be 
too hard to write an email to this list.

OTOH it would be good enough if the list of developers in the main 
pom.xml of Corona only contains the names of committers that already 
have contributed to Corona instead of listing all committers there that 
have technical write access to the repository.

>> Additionally I'd also like to see a separate Jira project for Corona.
>> Are there any objections if ask infra in behalf of the Cocoon PMC to
>> create one for us?
> That can happen independently, as soon as the name
> is decided. Would it be COCOON-SOMETHING ?

This will depend whether we want to call it Apache Something or Apache 
Cocoon Something. See below.

>> Finally this brings me to my last question: Do we want or do we have to
>> change the name "Corona"? For the legal part of this question, who can I
>> ask to get a final yes or no?
> The Apache Incubator docs should have some guidelines
> about this topic, since this issue often arises there.
> The Incubator general mail list would have lots of
> examples of people struggling with this issue, and hence
> guidance from ASF members.
> A quick search found these docs:
> See any project's "Status report"
> The first item on their "Incubation work items"
> is to be sure that the name is okay. e.g.
> The instruction says:
>  "Make sure that the requested project name does not
>  already exist and check to be sure
>  that the name is not already trademarked for an
>  existing software product."

Does the ASF have an account?

> A quick search for "corona software java" shows some
> high profile software products.

Ok, this means that we have to find a better name.

> First we should define the mission of this subproject.

Corona has two main goals:

  1. Become the best platform for RESTful services and
     RESTful web applications based on the concept
     of pipelines.

  2. Provide a generic pipeline Java API with SAX
     and STaX based default implementations.

> We will need a one-sentence description anyway.
> Then the appropriate name should fall out.
> I lean towards "Fibre" or "Silk". However because it
> might not be the pipeline API that Cocoon uses, then
> perhaps some other type of fibre. For example,
> "Kapok" - "a fine fibrous cotton-like substance
> found surrounding the seeds of a tropical tree".
> (Australian Oxford English Dictionary). The term
> "Java Kapok" is used, but from my quick search
> not in the software industry.
> So my proposals are:
> Apache Cocoon Kapok
> Apache Cocoon Fibre

I tend towards Apache (Cocoon) Silk because it is short and easily 
pronounceable (in contrast to Fibre) and doesn't sound like Klingon 

I don't know if we should add "Cocoon" to the name and have no strong 

> We should consider another possibility. If it
> does not have any hope of being the/a pipeline
> API for Cocoon, then perhaps it should go
> completely to Apache Incubator to become its
> own project. I would prefer that it stay here.

I don't see why it should have to go through the incubator. There is no 
external project that wants to join Apache and all the work that has 
gone into Corona so far was done under the eyes of the Cocoon PMC.

I prefer that Corona stays here.

Reinhard Pötz                           Managing Director, {Indoqa} GmbH

Member of the Apache Software Foundation
Apache Cocoon Committer, PMC member        

View raw message