commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Phil Steitz" <>
Subject Re: [math] Commons Proper (was: Re: [VOTE] New Commiter Phil Steitz)
Date Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:54:48 GMT
Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> Thanks Tetsuya,
> I suspect this would be the path to be taken in the near future.
> I think we are getting close, Robert is right, "patience", we will get 
> there. But, being mathematicians tend to be perfectionists, I'm not sure 
> all of us feel [math] is ready for Commons proper just yet. I'm sure 
> others have varying opinions on the matter. All good statisticians 
> recognize variability exists in all populations ;-)

I certainly don't feel like we are ready for a release at this time -- 
and believe me, I am no perfectionist. My understanding is that you 
don't come out of the sandbox until you are ready to release something. 
  I think that it is best for us to spend our time getting things on the 
task list completed, deciding what we want to include in a release and 
doing the work to get there.


> -Mark
> Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
>> Hello, Robert and Mark, All.
>> I think (IMHO) math project is worthy to become,  be promoted to
>> commons-proper. There are many commons-proper
>> projects which apparently are at standstill in their activities.
>> In this situation, Phil and math project seem very active
>> and deserve to be notified more widely and openly.
>> To avoid the apprehensions such as Robert worried,
>> IMHO,
>> 1. Vote for promotion of the sandbox-math to commons-proper
>> 2. Next to #1, nominate, [VOTE] Phil as a committer
>> or
>> 3. #1 and #2 simultaneously
>> These above might be fair and good way for the things go well.
>> I'd love to use the math-product as one of the users eagerly.
>> Sincerely,
>> Tetsuya
>> -- 
>> On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 20:30:05 +0100
>> (Subject: Re: [VOTE] New Commiter Phil Steitz)
>> robert burrell donkin <> wrote:
>>> i'm sad to do this (since i think that phil's demonstrated the 
>>> qualities required and i'd support a nomination when and if math 
>>> makes it into the commons proper) but i think that nominating people 
>>> for contributions to the sandbox will cause troubles (sooner or 
>>> later) and also that it's against the spirit of the common charter.
>>> as i understand it, the commons is responsible for supervising the 
>>> sandbox,
>>>  nothing more. the sandbox is not a subproject in it's own right and 
>>> exists only to allow apache developers to collaborate. i believe that 
>>> the commons can and should only elect committers for its own components.
>>> i also feel that one of the reasons stated by mark for nomination 
>>> (that we need him on board to make it to release) is not a good one. 
>>> we in the commons are charged by the ASF with supervising the 
>>> sandbox. if there is insufficient energy to push a component forwards 
>>> then there will be insufficient energy to properly supervise new 
>>> committers. i'd like to ask the math developers for a little 
>>> patience. i'm convinced that commons-math has a bright future but it 
>>> will take a little time. i also hope that phil doesn't take this 
>>> personally (this isn't anything against him personally but against 
>>> the principle of nominating new non-apache committers for sandbox 
>>> components).
>>> -1
>>> - robert
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> Tetsuya Kitahata --  Terra-International, Inc.
>> E-mail: :
>> (Apache Jakarta Translation, Japanese)
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message