forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Noels <>
Subject Re: The organization of
Date Tue, 03 Dec 2002 01:03:00 GMT
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]

Sam Ruby wrote:

>  > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
>  > projects.  Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
>  > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
>  > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
>  > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
>  > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.

Please define 'a few':

bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang

 From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community 
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.

> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have. 
> But the above provides a recipe to find out.  Without changing any 
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to 
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects. 
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their 
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).

I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially 
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting 
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it 
based on some well-defined criteria.

Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be 
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.

That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like 
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.

> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to 
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.

I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.

> What do others think?

I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)

Steven Noels                  
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at    
stevenn at                stevenn at

View raw message