deltacloud-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From André Dietisheim <andre.dietish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: jboss tools deltacloud java client contributions
Date Tue, 24 May 2011 07:08:16 GMT
Hi David, Hi Francesco, Hi all

thanks for the quick answers :) Dont worry, I'm pretty much used (I'm 
already committer @eclipse.org) and willing to fullfill all requirements 
to move the code to ASF. I'll have to check with my project lead about 
specific issues though (renaming), but I guess it shouldn't be an issue. 
See my comments inline:


On 05/23/2011 11:56 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
>        * Could we rename the org.jboss.tools.deltacloud package to
>          org.apache.deltacloud ? (Or should we make that
>          org.deltacloud ?)

I have no issue with that, but I'll have to check with Max (JBoss Tools 
lead) about implications. Afaik org.apache.deltacloud would be the 
naming scheme used for java code @apache, right (at least this was used 
in apache clerezza which I was committing to)?

>        * Could we change the mentions of 'JBoss' either to 'Apache
>          Software Foundation' or leave them out entirely ? Instead, we'd
>          put a NOTICE file into clients/java/NOTICE, similar to [1]

I'm checking with Max about this.

>        * Would you be willing and able to act as the maintainer of the
>          Java client; in particular, would you make releases of the Java
>          client (ideally, we'd coordinate releases between server and the
>          clients, but there's nothing wrong if the Java client releases
>          more often than the server) The main thing I am looking for is
>          somebody who will build jars and help write release notes. Of
>          course, as the Java maintainer, we'd get you commit access.

I have basically not much time left to work on this code since I'm 
moving towards work on JBoss AS7 and Openshift tooling. I guess though 
that I would be perfectly able to do basic maintenance since I would 
also have to do that @jboss.org too. In other terms this basically means 
that I wont be able to implement new features. Is that ok for you guys? 
I was actually hoping that my client would have superior visibility 
@apache and chances to attract contributions/maintainers would improve.

Cheers
André

Mime
View raw message