Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of niall.pemberton@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.220.214 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=UpYrTjMaPczOEB8YVLF90Nlq0cNcZRGBlRBgubdyeH9jeDNivwD40HyrQ9A7wnw0YP
         IakldPLi/+GsNVrPEh5CeX6ScXKaokT9Mf4whupb3BhqNGR/LDT8v8QMFhEbdgK3tqBu
         Pn3pWQXdqYTFR7lBNTPIo21YbMK69PJ2/OmW8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <291627.74213.qm@web54402.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <4B219CE4.2050404@apache.org>
	 <71235db40912102306m57d3f7e7n29251c529851318b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <71e1b5740912102356u71fd69a4t3e3df732eadb557d@mail.gmail.com>
	 <55afdc850912110156m70e2cc6ew9b6409b1379d48d9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <71e1b5740912110222x77e82d21ic890717a81c6b923@mail.gmail.com>
	 <291627.74213.qm@web54402.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:29:26 +0000
Message-ID: <55afdc850912110329l74fa31dbybeebbdfeddaaaddc@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation
From: Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wro=
te:
> ----- Original Message ----
>
>> From: ant elder <antelder@apache.org>
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Fri, December 11, 2009 5:22:13 AM
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Niall Pemberton
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:56 AM, ant elder wrote:
>> >> A quick search so there has been some discussion on commons-dev - [1]
>> >>
>> >> Does this really need to be incubated - the proposal says its intende=
d
>> >> to graduate to Apache Commons and replace the existing Validator 1.x
>> >> component as a new 2.0 codebase, from the discussion on commons-dev
>> >> everyone seems fine with that out come, and only 2 of the 7 proposed
>> >> committers are not existing Validator or ASF committers - so couldn't
>> >> this just go straight to commons as a code grant and make the two new
>> >> guys committers in recognition of contibuting the new code?
>> >
>> > I raised this on private@commons and reported back to dev@commons on
>> > that discussion here:
>> >
>> > http://markmail.org/message/lkyjl6gaxawspgdt
>> >
>> > In summary though, there was very little support to go that route and
>> > some objections.
>> >
>> > All commons components share the same set of mailing lists which makes
>> > it easier for PMC members to provide oversight for the 30+ components
>> > that live there. As part of this proposal we want to use the commons
>> > mailing lists for commits and discussion so that by the time this
>> > podling is ready to graduate the new committers and Commons PMC will
>> > have a better knowledge of each other and there will be no issue with
>> > voting in the new committers.
>> >
>> > The use of the commons mailing lists is in the proposal and was part
>> > of the vote held on dev@commons to sponsor this incubation effort:
>> >
>> > http://markmail.org/message/mqdft736b5vasezs
>> >
>> > Niall
>> >
>>
>> From the first email referenced was Roman ever asked if he'd mind
>> submitting patches for a while to earn Karma if the code did go
>> straight to commons? Seems a bit a of a shame to need to go the whole
>> incubation process just for one commit access.
>>
>> Re the the poddling use the existing commons mailing lists its may be
>> worth pointing out this recent thread:
>> http://apache.markmail.org/message/ifinvq7wqmeoo5ix
>
> Commons is badly busted if it can't allow a new person access to his/her
> own code in a fucking sandbox. =A0Incubating this project because some we=
enies are
> uncomfortable about the nature of the meritocracy over in commons isn't t=
he solution:

Small code bases with small communities are difficult (?almost
impossible?) to operate here at the ASF. Commons does OK by providing
enough community and oversight to allow 30+ such small components to
work here. But it relies on people taking time to keep and eye on
components they have no interest in and I didn't want to jeopardize
that co-operation by trying to force a decision on the sandbox. Really
though, I'm not sure why you're being so abusive over this - is it
really a big deal where the code sits in the subversion repository
(Commons Sandbox or Incubator)?

> have commons hold a public vote and make an actual decision. =A0If they v=
ote to
> incubate the damned thing, it's an incredibly stupid decision, but so be =
it.

The end result is we want this to be a "proper" (i.e. not Sandbox)
Commons component - and that isn't going to happen with a completely
unknown (to Commons) code base & person. It needs an incubation period
- whether thats done through the Incubator or the Sandbox - so whats
the big deal?

Niall

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org