www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Husted <hus...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Jakarta++
Date Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:03:07 GMT
10/28/2002 9:39:47 AM, Pier Fumagalli <pier@betaversion.org> 
>I would just like to add one little thing. Thinking about this 
>"flexible" structure where the oversight chain 
(committers/pmc/board) isY
>different from the "grouping chain" (jakarta or xml as focal 
centers of
>communities based around projects having different oversight 
chains), will
>allow also project whose scope is blurred between tow 
different groups to be
>represented by both...
>My example being Cocoon, which could be hosted by Jakarta with 
>"competing alikes" Turbine, Struts, ... (web application 
frameworks) but at
>the same time by XML because if the core technologies used by 

A sensible way to go would be to look toward sites like Jakarta 
and XML (and whatever for .NET) being mainly the home of 
Commons projects. They could then also list and promote the 
other Apache Projects in their language group (many of which 
would be clients of the site's Commons). 

I think in the end we will find that the Commons idea is mostly 
language specific, since many of the components are filling 
gaps in the host language. Before long, an Apache Commons will 
tend to splinter into groups working on this language or that 

Any Commons component so clearly defined that it could be 
implemented in multiple languages that it might really be a 
small product. By implementing it multiple languages, it would 
quickly become a larger product, and then be a Project 

I also think that the Commons is the best way to build 
community among developers working on different projects. By 
giving them a place to share their stuff, we give everyone a 
chance to work together and get to know one another.

Originally, Tomcat was the "anchor" for Jakarta. But looking 
forward, I could see the Commons filling that role instead. 

As we attract Committers working in other languages, like C#, 
they might want to establish a Commons site too, and other C# 
Projects listed there, regardless of whether they are living in 
the incubator or as a top level Project. 

Which brings up another critical point. I think a product 
hosted at a place called "incubator" might have some trouble 
attracting a Community. =:0) I agree with having the Project, 
and using the name to remind everyone what its about, but we 
may need to list the incubator products along side more mature  
products to attact a stable audience. Which brings us back to 
using places like Jakarta and XML like portals, rather than as 
product hosts.


View raw message