geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul McMahan" <>
Subject Re: [Code donation] J2G Conversion tool
Date Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:48:41 GMT
I took a look at this package and found a lot of potentially valuable
material for Geronimo users.  It contains source code for a collection
of command line utils and eclipse plugins, several unit test cases,
build scripts in good working order, and good documentation.

The project is not designed to run in the Geronimo server, so it would
not be a good candidate for a Geronimo plugin.  Instead I thought at
first that its eclipse plugins could be merged with Geronimo's devtool
subproject and the command line utils could be merged into geronimo's
bin/ directory alongside the deployment and startup scripts.  But then
I realized that the command line utils actually have dependencies on
eclipse in one way or another.  So it seems that the entire package
would more likely fit into Geronimo's devtools subproject.  I wonder
what Sachin thinks about that... :-)

A quick "wc -l" counted almost 10 KLOC, and I noticed several IBM
copyrights, package names, etc in the src which I suppose the
incubation process would address.  I don't know enough about that
process to comment on whether or not its strictly necessary.  But if
an ASF member wants to champion this entry through that process then I
can help provide technical feedback from a Geronimo perspective.  One
thing that incubation might help address is how much community support
will be required to keep the package useful and up to date since the
material it processes (Geronimo and JBoss deployment plans) tends to
change with almost every release.

Best wishes,

On 1/23/07, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <> wrote:
> So far we have received a few positive comments, no negative and no vetos.
> So are we ok with this donation and ready to move forward, possible into
> incubation?
> Filip
> Kevan Miller wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 17, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on the CCLA's with a patch submission.  If it's a considerable
> >> piece of code perhaps a software grant may be in order.
> >>
> >> There is no reason why something this small should incubate.
> >
> > It seems to match the incubator guidelines for code donations pretty
> > well. You may disagree with these guidelines, but the incubation
> > process for code donations (which are being accepted by an existing
> > project) seems lightweight enough... I don't see why we shouldn't
> > follow it... It's 2 days of waiting + some extra paper work collecting
> > info that we should probably have anyway...
> >
> > --kevan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date:
> > 1/16/2007 4:36 PM
> >
> >

View raw message