Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 98039 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2004 19:24:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Aug 2004 19:24:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 77536 invoked by uid 500); 14 Aug 2004 19:24:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 77454 invoked by uid 500); 14 Aug 2004 19:24:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 77441 invoked by uid 99); 14 Aug 2004 19:24:54 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [209.249.229.10] (HELO ricouer.tsdinc.steitz.com) (209.249.229.10) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:24:52 -0700 Received: from Lavoie.tsdinc.steitz.com ([209.249.229.4]) by ricouer.tsdinc.steitz.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:24:49 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([130.13.97.180]) by Lavoie.tsdinc.steitz.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:24:48 -0400 Message-ID: <411E3CE7.8090802@steitz.com> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:25:11 -0400 From: Phil Steitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [all] Math needs a "user" email list. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2004 19:24:48.0943 (UTC) FILETIME=[5D5BE3F0:01C48234] X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Henri Yandell wrote: > +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. Sorry, but I am still -0 to splitting discussion or development of [math] from j-c. > > 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. Do we have jelly-user-discuss, digester-user-discuss, collections-user-discuss etc.? I agree with Martin that j-c is one community and I see no compelling reason to split [math] off and some good reasons not to. As a user of multiple commons components, I monitor both commons-dev and commons-user. As a commons committer, I try to help out on both of these as well. There are *lots* of benefits to having the additional eyeballs in the j-c community that I, at least, am not willing to give up. I also strongly disagree with the implication that we can separate discussion of "Java-related dev issues" from math-related ones. Commons-math is a Java math library. Splitting the discussion in this way is like saying that [digester] or [jelly] should discuss XML-related issues on "digester-user-discuss" or "jelly-user-discuss" or that Stephen's recent post about Tree structures in [collections] should be on "collections-user-discuss." This is not good for the community, IMHO. It also threatens to move us away from the code-centric model that makes Apache work (again, IMHO). Phil > > 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org