commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [PRE-PROPOSAL] Commons as an Apache Top Level Project
Date Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:30:11 GMT
That's correct Phil. They're not against a J-C as a TLP.

I'm pretty sure that if we were to goto, then we
will have no problems unless othername is considered too abstract I
guess. It seems hard for us to come up with a meaningful name that
doesn't use the word 'java' due to trademark reasons, and isn't too
abstract though., are the only
ones that ever jump out.

We also have the package name thing to think about. All of our code is
designed to be imported, unlike say Tomcat or Velocity where it is a
minority who would be importing a class, so we have a huge issue if we
choose to change the package name structure.

We have an issue in terms of sibling projects to go with us. ECS,
Regexp, ORO have often been talked about in terms of having a Commons
future, and HttpClient/Math are planning to leave at some point. The
latter is a larger issue, where do they go from a TLP?

I believe that if we were prepared to adjust the charter to be
language neutral, then we would have a lot of support to take, though there would be some nay-sayers and it's
hard to say who'd be in the majority, but it might be worth finding

My personal vote is that we either consider a language-neutral, or we wait until such a time as Jakarta is so
empty that Commons can move every component to SLP and 'inherit'
Jakarta. :)

There is one difference between a need for a Tomcat TLP and a need for
a Commons TLP. The current chair (3rd person at 9am is so beautifully
pretentious) is a poor representative of Tomcat as they are a very
active community and he has limited involvement with them as a
community; however said current chair does pay a lot of attention to
commons-dev and commons-user :)

That said, Brett is right in his email that we need to become more
active in managing the health of Commons.

There was one suggestion that we could effectively TLP but retain the
same customer view; that is Apache Jakarta-Commons coud be a TLP in
which the name Jakarta-Commons has only typographical links to Jakarta
(and we'd be on the Jakarta site if Jakarta PMC agreed). It's the
first time I've heard this suggestion, and would have been superb 2
years ago when the migration started, but it's an option.

Another option is the Jakarta PMC ^ Commons committers. Those J-C
committers who are on the PMC could just start talking and calling
votes etc on this list. The whole point of having 3 pmc members per
subproject, or component in our case, is to allow for such a thing and
I see no reason for us not to use community set-theory to end up with
the equivalent of a J-C PMC immediately, providing we report results
back to the central PMC on general@. It's probably what Jakarta
subprojects should have been doing for the last year and I'm hitting
myself for not thinking of it then :) I'm not aware of any ruling that
PMC decisions have to be forged on a general@ list.

We've actually been doing this across Jakarta whenever we have a vote,
but I think we've been quite focused on the PMC being where
non-release/non-nomination votes get held.

As I said, 9am so treat this as an early morning brain-dump (yep, I'm
that late for work).


On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:00:25 -0500, Phil Steitz <> wrote:
> The first thing to decide is do we want to go TLP.   Lets not get hung
> up on the name.  My read of Hen's post is that the board is not
> against a TLP based on what is now Jakarta Commons, so if we want to
> go TLP they will at least consider it (without forcing us to expand
> scope).  So, all those in favor....
> Phil
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:16:31 +0000, Rory Winston <> wrote:
> > Er, I thought the basis of the board's objections as outlined by Henri earlier was
that as a Java-only repository is a no-no....
> >
> > "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Are we ready for this??  If others agree, I am willing to draft a
> > > proposal.   Before doing that, I would like to make sure that others
> > > feel that now is a good time to take this step and also get some
> > > feedback on the basics:
> > >
> > > Scope - slightly edited from the current charter, removing the reference
> > > to server products and to Jakarta:
> > >
> > > "The subproject shall create and maintain packages written in the Java
> > > language, designed to be used independently of any larger product or
> > > framework."
> > >
> > > Initial Committers - all current j-c committers
> > > Initial PMC - Jakarta PMC ^ j-c committers
> > >
> > > Name  - Apache Commons
> > >
> > > The last item might be contentious, but I think we should try to keep
> > > the name.  My second choice would be "Jakarta" but that is (still ;-) taken.
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.*
> > Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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