commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael A. Smith" <>
Subject Re: moving to a top-level project (was: [Ant nudge STATUS] Betterthan we thought...)
Date Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:36:41 GMT
Greg Stein wrote:
> [ damn, I hate reply-to... it totally horks cross-posting... adding
>   commons-dev back... ]

reply-to-all leaves commons-dev in there, at least for me.  If reply-to 
wasn't set, you'd still have to use reply-to-all.  :)

> On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 08:57:57AM -0500, Michael A. Smith wrote:
>>Greg Stein wrote:
>>>On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 04:08:02PM -0500, Michael A. Smith wrote:
>>>>So, to clarify, committers on jakarta-commons voted for creating a 
>>>>management body of the code within the jakarta-commons cvs repository. 
>>>>Costin calls this the commons PMC, although the distinction should be 
>>>>made that this is not a board-recognized PMC.
>>>And to prevent confusion, I would highly suggest that the jakarta-commons
>>>committers find and use a different name than "pmc". Otherwise, there will
>>>always be a "to clarify" when talking about it :-)
>>yeah, I know.  I've tried to only refer to a "management body" or 
>>"oversight board" or other generic terms to describe it rather than 
>>overloading the PMC term and confusing everyone.  Hopefully Costin will 
>>start doing the same.  :)
> Somebody used the term SPMC (SubProject Management Committee). That
> certainly helps to distinguish it.

yup.  I'd agree with that.  :)

> [Since the time I wrote my note above] I just went and read the thread on
> commons-dev that Costin started. It looks like the end result was "well,
> let's defer this for now". Unless I missed something, this means that it
> doesn't really matter what the name is... you guys aren't doing it :-)

yeah, I was going to mention that.  Don't know why it didn't make it 
into my mail.

> I do want to point out one item that Costin wrote near the end of the
> thread:
>     I don't know - if it is too complicated we'll need a simpler 
>     solution. I hope we all realise that nobody can track all
>     the code commits and all the code in general, and sooner
>     or later an error can happen.
> It is interesting to point out that if the commons-dev group has a hard time
> monitoring all the activity, then how could the nine members of the Jakarta
> PMC monitor all of Jakarta? Eesh... :-)  I'd say that is one of the
> motivators for "spinning out" projects from Jakarta -- provide each with a
> PMC that is highly focused on just that project and provide it with the
> legal umbrella/protection of the ASF.

Isn't that what this reorg thing is partially about?  :)

> Of course, I'm fearing the day that some J-C components may choose to move
> to A-C. My commit review load is going to skyrocket :-(


> (but that can also be a signal that something ought to move to top-level;
>  something like the commons httpclient might be a good candidate for
>  spinning out of J-C and Jakarta altogether... *shrug*)

I've tried to encourage extremely active commons components, like 
httpclient (our most active) and jelly (which is still in the sandbox), 
to move themselves to a higher level, but since I'm not active on those 
particular compmonents, I haven't been too vocal about it.  When I say 
"higher level,"  I'm referring to the Jakarta subproject level (rather 
than a commons component), but that's only because I'm not sure I 
understood the option of promoting to a new top level apache project.

> Cheers,
> -g


Michael A. Smith

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message