commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [math] TLP
Date Thu, 14 Jan 2016 02:16:10 GMT
Commons projects that use Git like Math and Lang are already mirrored on



On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Ole Ersoy <> wrote:

> I love the idea.  I also think commons will get a lot more eye balls if it
> gets all the repositories on github and enables the watch button as well as
> github issues.
> Cheers,
> Ole
> On 01/13/2016 07:24 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> I like having [math] in Commons. There are other multi-module projects in
>> Commons, that's not an issue IMO, just good project design.
>> My main worry is more on the overall health of Commons or perception that
>> [math] is "leaving" Commons, the more eyeballs on Commons the better.
>> Gary
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Phil Steitz <>
>> wrote:
>> I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top level
>>> project at the ASF.  This has been proposed before, and I have
>>> always come down on the side of staying in Commons, but I am now
>>> convinced that it is a good step for us to take for the following
>>> reasons:
>>> 0) We have several committers who are really only interested in
>>> [math], so being on the Commons PMC does not really make sense for them
>>> 1) The code base has swollen in size to well beyond the "small sharp
>>> tools" that make up the bulk of Commons
>>> 2) We are probably at the point where we should consider splitting
>>> [math] itself into separately released subcomponents (could be done
>>> in Commons, but starts smelling a little Jakarta-ish when Commons
>>> has components with subcomponents).
>>> The downsides are
>>> a) [newPMC] loses Commons eyeballs / contributors who would not find
>>> us otherwise
>>> b) Migration / repackaging pain
>>> c) Overhead of starting and managing a PMC
>>> d) Other Commons components lose some eyeballs
>>> Personally, I think the benefits outweigh the downsides at this
>>> point.  New better tools and ASF processes have made b) and c) a
>>> little less onerous.  I don't think d) is really a big problem for
>>> Commons, as those of us who work on other stuff here could continue
>>> to do so.  It is possible that a) actually works in the reverse
>>> direction - i.e., we are easier to find as a TLP.
>>> What do others think about this?
>>> Phil
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

E-Mail: |
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <>
Spring Batch in Action <>

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message