commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <bay...@generationjava.com>
Subject Re: [all] Math needs a "user" email list.
Date Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:09:20 GMT

+1 to a request for Jakarta-Math-Discuss list. I'd like to be
Apache-Math-Discuss, but that might cause issues, cf the Python mail list
request a while back.

Why I like this: It is not tied to the commons-math code, but to the
community that the commons-math code wants to join. I expect [math] to be
using it for math discussion with commons-dev for Java related dev issues
(such as maven, site etc) and releases. Average Java joes would still come
to commons-user for [math] questions, so commons-math would have to be
covering that too.

I said +1 in that I'm prepared to go onto infrastructure and ask for
this etc, get the PMC to ask for it or whatever.

Hen

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Stephen Colebourne wrote:

> I argued for Apache Math as I believe its this best goal. Remember that size
> is not what defines a TLP, community is. However, as none of the main [math]
> developers want this at present we need to find a second solution.
>
> I am more convinced of the need now. The proposed new list is in fact not
> really a "user" list in the classic definition that we have. It is much more
> of a discussion list.
>
> The only question I have is whether votes, and actual code discussions will
> occur on this list or not. (And I ask that from a supervision point of
> view - HttpClient lost supervision/review when they created a new list)
>
> So, I reckon that commons-math-user (or commons-math-discuss?) could be the
> best solution to the problem. Consider me +0.5 so long as votes and true
> code discussions remain on commons-dev.
>
> Stephen
>
>
> > > Henri Yandell wrote:
> > > >I'd also suggest that 3 months after creating it, Mark would have to
> > > >justify the creation by showing that community has begun to grow.
>
> > > I think math could accept such an agreement. What would be a
> > > justification, "list activity" above a certain threshold?
>
> > Existence of community. No idea how you measure this :) Noise is one,
> > number of active members would be a better one, but you have to measure
> > active as people making noise.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message