Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of brett.porter@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.82.192 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=GmUxze2eNLsPKVOUYduURdePtOhmvyGjkBJAoHwy0KMVmmi8uQs46qPhXhRh7l7roNxyIJ2LjBJLcRFgu01T0n40aZzBtI0Iyc1v2IBE+OivjzduYow0k/SL9IZYYl8/3tnMucquJ9i8h68Sk76O05ITOcK9TT31lfIhEsffeNA=
Message-ID: <9e3862d80601071452t76688cc5yef8554197416fc11@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 09:52:46 +1100
From: Brett Porter <brett.porter@gmail.com>
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [MINA] Should it stay here? (Was: Re: [scm][VOTE] Reorganizing
 the re-organized structure.)
In-Reply-To: <20060107191834.eqkx7l444288kc08@webmail.daune-consult.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <768dcb2e0601051929p39fb1541h@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1136595193.25583.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20060107101622.rkxxa2qpw6ooo8gk@webmail.daune-consult.com>
	 <43BF88F1.8030103@pandora.be> <43BF9E9C.2070506@bellsouth.net>
	 <43BFD235.7040509@pandora.be>
	 <20060107191834.eqkx7l444288kc08@webmail.daune-consult.com>

This has been brought up a lot now. Time for a FAQ on the MINA page?

For those points:
* separate tree structure: this can be done within the Directory tree
if necessary. It can have a separate trunk again if that makes things
easier as well.

* separate mailing list: as already said, this is being done

So, can anyone list a benefit of moving MINA now rather than later? And whe=
re?

The downsides are that it will take more work, and the *only* place it
can go right now is Jakarta (commons) - which would imply either
staying there or another move. I don't see any benefit in that. No
other TLP would be suitable right now, and it's got a long way to go
before being ready to be self-sustaining as a TLP.

Cheers,
Brett

On 1/8/06, daune.jf@daune-consult.com <daune.jf@daune-consult.com> wrote:
>
> Moving Mina does not necessarily imply changing who contributes/leads.
>
> It is just a matter of convenience: separate tree structure, its own mail=
ing
> list (not having to use prefixes [MINA], [DIREVE]...)
>
> Cheers,
>
> J-F
>
> > Alex wrote:
> >
> >> Projects don't jump out into their own umbrella every day or by
> >> themselves :-).  It takes people.  This project (MINA) was born here
> >> through the ideas and collaboration of a few people.  Trustin of
> >> course was and is to a large degree the main driver and this must
> >> change to go further.  We've been thinking about this for some time
> >> as you may have seen from previous emails.
> >
> > I totally understand
> >
> >> Perhaps you guys can start getting more involved to make your wishes
> >> come true ;).
> >
> > yes, I'd love to, not sure if my boss would too.
> >
> >>
> >> FYI - the MINA mailing list is on order from infrastructure.
> >
> > great
> >
> > by the way, I would not like mina to become part of jakarta-commons.
> > I guess that's not gonna happen soon, right ?
> >
> >
>
>
>
>