Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 532DC9596 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 22:58:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 30528 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2012 22:58:36 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 30484 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2012 22:58:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 30476 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2012 22:58:35 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:58:35 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [173.201.192.109] (HELO p3plsmtpa06-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) (173.201.192.109) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:58:26 +0000 Received: (qmail 9868 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2012 22:58:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (76.252.112.72) by p3plsmtpa06-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (173.201.192.109) with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2012 22:58:04 -0000 Message-ID: <4F2B14E8.6030401@rowe-clan.net> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:57:44 -0600 From: "William A. Rowe Jr." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org Subject: Re: [disscuss] Retirement of stdcxx to the 'Attic'? References: <4F2AC1FE.3040604@rowe-clan.net> <4F2AEF3F.9040500@roguewave.com> In-Reply-To: <4F2AEF3F.9040500@roguewave.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 2/2/2012 2:17 PM, Andrew Black wrote: > While I am not completely familiar with the process, I took a couple minutes to look at > the website for the Attic project ( http://attic.apache.org/ ), and I thought I'd > summarize the implications of this move as I understand them. Good summary. > * The project is forked. I get the impression that there are at least a couple informal > forks of the codebase out there, but I have neither the time nor inclination to follow > these forks and commit the changes back to subversion. The Attic website says they will > link to any forks which have been created, but I don't know what criteria must be met for > this to happen. The much larger issue is that the ASF is designed as a collaboration hub where multiple consumers can be represented. It is designed to avoid the need for forks except in radical divisions within communities where two or more groups want the code to proceed in different directions. In order to remain a project, the ASF requires a PMC composed of the contributors to the project (committers) which represent active user - developers of the project's code, and are willing to both incorporate all reasonable changes and draw in new individuals who are frequently offering those changes. As a standards body implementation, we would /hope/ there aren't huge fractures in the direction of the code :) If there are multiple forks at this point, the questions are why, and what can be done to bring it all back together into a single community where no one company or individual is shouldering the burden of entirely maintaining the code on their own. Feel free to chime in here on these questions.