commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] New component: Rational numbers
Date Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:30:08 GMT
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 06:35:43 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>> I agree with Benedikt. Plus, I have no idea who in Commons will
>> maintain this component since the “Math” guys say they con’t want it.
>>
>
> I gave concrete (positive) arguments for having the components submitted
> to this vote (see other threads).
> Could you please comment on why it would not be a good component?
>
> It's absolutely not that the "Math guys don't want it".
> It's that it would better for everybody (developers here and there, users,
> maintainers, release managers, you name it) to have independent components
> for independent and/or core/standard and stable functionality.
>
> When I argued about having flexibility where needed (e.g. in non-mature
> "CM" code), the "stability" argument flag is raised to oppose it.
>
> When I argue about enforcing stability (by consciously choosing the
> "Commons" home), the "maintenance" is raised even though by definition
> of "stability", this is unlikely to be an actual problem.
>
> Actually, the really problematic codes (those currently unsupported) will
> _all_ go to the TLP (for the PMC there to decide what to do).
> What I propose as new components are the "easy" stuff, meaning either
> fairly easy to understand even by a newcomer, or easy to maintain (lots
> of unit tests; small, independent functions etc.).
>

This (and new components VOTE thread) paints a more confusing picture than
before to me.

You are proposing to organize code into Commons Component/possible
TLP/Attic/Something based on the current knowledge of some participants,
including yourself, and I am grateful that you've been doing all this work.
Part of me wants to stay out of the way and let the do-o-cracy play out but
another part really feels this will be counter productive in the end (not
to mention a lot of busy work.)

As was mentioned by someone else before, people come and go, with different
levels of expertise.

For me, the keep-it-simple principle, not to mention least surprise says to
keep whole the pile in one place, in Commons or as a TLP, either way.
Whether we use more than one Maven module here or as a TLP is a different
matter and not relevant to the residence of the code base. We have other
Commons component that have multiple modules, no big deal.

Gary


> Having those as components will accelerate the opportunity for wider
> adoption (code is "production"-ready, modulo rather trivial adjustments
> to their new status), rather than having them wait until the TLP is on
> track.
>
>
> Gilles
>
>
> Ralph
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2016, at 11:26 PM, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> -0
>>>
>>> (I keep insisting, that we finish the organizational things first, so
>>> that CM can take such decisions without involving others. OTOH, I
>>> won't stop you from doin that.)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> This is one of several votes for establishing new Commons components
>>>> out of functionality developed inside the "Commons Math" component.
>>>>
>>>> This vote is dedicated to the following functionality:
>>>>  Representation of rational numbers
>>>>
>>>> The concerned code is the contents of the following classes and
>>>> packages:
>>>>  org.apache.commons.math4.fraction
>>>> located in the "develop" branch of Commons Math:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-math.git;a=tree;f=src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math4/fraction;h=446df46270ea0d00b7b23b603ca153df9ec18ffa;hb=refs/heads/develop
>>>>
>>>> Notes:
>>>> * This component will depend on the "Standard math functions" component
>>>>   (cf. other VOTE thread).
>>>> * Code size: ~1400 lines of code (unit tests not included).
>>>> * API: stable.
>>>> * Estimated minimum Java version: 5 (?)
>>>>
>>>> All are welcome to vote, especially potential users of the candidate
>>>> component and people who'd like to contribute to it, through user
>>>> support,
>>>> bug-fixes and enhancements, documentation, release management.
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1, this would be a valid Commons component.
>>>> [ ] -1, this won't be a good Commons component because ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Gilles
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.keystonedevelopment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/evolution-of-the-wheel-300x85.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

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