myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Schofield <sean.schofi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: MyFaces component project
Date Wed, 16 Mar 2005 18:26:32 GMT
I think we are talking about a "sandbox" such as the one used by
commons.  You do not have to be an ASF committer to commit to the
sandbox but you need to be a committer to start a new sandbox project
(I think I have that right.)  That could be a good way to encourage
new contributions.

I still think we are getting a little bit ahead of ourselves with some
of these discussions.  There's no harm in discussing these ideas
(which are all very interesting) but we still have some basics to take
care of.  There is the issue of the next release (I noticed nobody has
voted on this yet), the lack of documentation, the mailing list and
cvs migration (from incubator-myfaces) to (myfaces), nighthly builds
and the lack of a formalized release process.

I know none of these outstanding issues is very exciting but we should
probably get a few things in order before going very far with new
proposals.  This is not to discourage discussion on these matters,
just a friendly reminder :-)

sean


On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:18:08 +0100, Matthias Wessendorf
<mailings@matthias-wessendorf.de> wrote:
> 
> > My only comment is to remind people that the ASF and SourceForge are
> > quite different in the way they work. The ASF is a meritocracy, while SF
> > tends to be more of a free-for-all. The relevance of this to a component
> > repository is that just because someone shows up at MyFaces with a new
> > component doesn't mean that they can necessarily get it added. It would
> > depend on whether or not they have a history with the project, and
> > whether the existing community deems that they have sufficient merit to
> > be invited to join - or whether existing committers are willing to take
> > responsibility for the component themselves. Of course, SF *can* work
> > this way as well. It's just not required to do so.
> 
> I like the Struts way and their *incubator* on SF :-)
> Some of the inventions that were placed their migrated
> after a period into the core of Struts.
> 
> So why not having such a thing for something like "Apache Faces"?
> Components from encouraged users could first integrated into a
> SF project, and may come into Apache Faces Components...
> 
> Just a thought,
> 
> Sure, time is also a factor for that. But perhaps it is worth
> to think about something like that!
> 
> -Matthias
> 
> 
> > So basically you need to decide how you want a central repository to
> > work before you can decide whether it should live at the ASF as part of
> > MyFaces, or live somewhere else such as SourceForge.
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
> >
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> Kito D. Mann (kmann@virtua.com)
> >> Virtua, Inc. (phone: 203-323-1244  fax: 203-323-2363)
> >> Author, JavaServer Faces in Action
> >> (<http://www.manning.com/mann/index.html>http://www.manning.com/mann/index.html)
> >>
> >> http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info
> >>
> >> "Existence doesn't necessarily mean living..."
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Matthias We├čendorf
> Aechterhoek 18
> DE-48282 Emsdetten
> Germany
> phone: +49-2572-9170275
> cell phone: +49-179-1118979
> email: matzew AT apache DOT org
> url: http://www.wessendorf.net
> callto://mwessendorf (Skype)
> icq: 47016183
>

Mime
View raw message