geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul McMahan" <>
Subject Re: Questions about site
Date Tue, 02 May 2006 19:07:43 GMT
I think Geir is really onto something here.  I spent a couple of years
working on a project whose goal was to facilitate software reuse
across the scientific computing community, which often uses a
development model similar to open source.  Our initial approach was to
create a monolithic repository for all the software files and this led
to a number of problems, everything from issues with intellectual
property rights to debates on look and feel (sound familiar?).  The
more successful approach was to create a customizable data model for
the software metadata and to harvest the entire collection of metadata
into a centralized repository that contained pointers to the files
hosted elsewhere.  Here's the project url with papers 'n stuff in case
anyone is interested in reading further

Best wishes,

On 5/2/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <> wrote:
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > I have to disagree with putting up an ASF option as the default.
> >
> > Let's say there are 50 plugins produced by Apache and 70 by outsiders.
> >
> > We have a choice to make the default a repository containing 50
> > entries, or a repository containing 120 entries.  What makes sense?
> Here's a alternative idea...
> How about hosting the directory/metadata of plugins at the ASF (or even
> cooler, do something mirrored to avoid the ire of infra when Geronimo is
> ubiquitous) and just have URLs to the plugin locations...?
> Then that drives all plug-in authors to come and "register" them here -
> just send a message to the mail list to have it included...
> Then it doesn't matter - you can list plugins under all licenses
> (including proprietary) - and they are hosted where they are hosted, if
> you know what I mean.  No worries about Apache hosting things that
> aren't from the ASF, etc.
> geir

View raw message