geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeremy Boynes" <jer...@coredevelopers.net>
Subject RE: [PMC] FAO PMC re: JavaMail and Alex Blewitt
Date Wed, 20 Aug 2003 22:51:49 GMT
> From: Alex Blewitt [mailto:Alex.Blewitt@ioshq.com]
> I have a couple of questions for Geronimo's PMC:

At this time Geronimo falls under the Incubator PMC.

>
> 1) What is the official Geronimo decision regarding a clean-room
> implementation of JavaMail's API? Are we happy to invest the time in
> (a) building, and (b) maintaining such a product to avoid licensing
> issues with (re)distribution of Sun's API reference code? As well as
> licensing, ease-of-use should come into consideration as well; a J2EE
> server that requires you to download extra components whilst installing
> may not be seen as user-friendly as one that comes all-in.
>

In my opinion, I think this is a worthwhile endeavour for precisely the
reason you describe - having a independently distributable version of this
API. I am concerned about the amount of effort required given the amount of
concrete code in the spec, and that it may be wasted if negotiations allow
free redistribution of Sun's version in the future. However, that is not as
yet on the radar.

So, given you are willing to step up and complete this work, I would vote +1
to continue.

> 2) On Saturday, Jason Dillon proposed a [Vote] to allow me commit
> rights to the repository [1]. (I'm guessing that this means a +1 :-).
> However, the only person who responded was Greg Wilkins [2] who
> abstained from that vote, given that I am not an existing ASF member.
> Did people not respond to the [Vote] on the grounds that it got buried
> in all the weekend's mail, or is such a non-response automatically
> counted as an abstention? And how long a timescale is it before the
> [Vote] is considered closed (and thus everyone who has not yet
> responded is automatically abstained)? FWIW I have signed the ASF2
> agreement, but failed succesfully to scan it since the fax number rang
> out when I called it. (I have it as a PDF anyway, so can always e-mail
> it if that is acceptable).

Personally, I think Jason jumped the gun here. Geronimo is only a couple of
weeks old and the community is still settling down. Becoming a committer at
Apache requires a commitment (sorry, bad pun) to the community over and
above the code; from what I have heard, it typically takes six months or so
before a vote (e.g. Paul Hammant's mail [3]). This is different to other
communities where gaining commit may be easier but it carries little
influence.

So at this time I would probably vote -1 on any proposal for a new committer
purely to let the community settle down. The exception to this would be for
someone with a proven track record either at ASF or on one of the affiliated
projects such as OpenEJB.

Having said that, the JavaMail implementation could be considered a isolated
effort under the 'specs' sub-module, so if the proposal was to allow Alex
commit in that area it might be different. However, I am not sure that the
process for this type of sub-sub-project in the incubator is well defined
and we're breaking enough new ground as it is.

--
Jeremy

[3] http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=&msgId=1004954


Mime
View raw message