atom feed27 messages in org.apache.commons.devRe: [feedparser] News / Status
FromSent OnAttachments
Niall PembertonMar 2, 2006 3:10 am 
Henri YandellMar 2, 2006 7:46 am 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 9:06 am 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 9:09 am 
James CarmanMar 2, 2006 9:11 am 
Henri YandellMar 2, 2006 9:13 am 
Henri YandellMar 2, 2006 9:14 am 
James CarmanMar 2, 2006 9:16 am 
Martin CooperMar 2, 2006 9:35 am 
Martin CooperMar 2, 2006 9:40 am 
Craig McClanahanMar 2, 2006 10:06 am 
Stephen ColebourneMar 2, 2006 11:14 am 
Simon KitchingMar 2, 2006 11:26 am 
robert burrell donkinMar 2, 2006 2:13 pm 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 2:49 pm 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 2:53 pm 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 3:02 pm 
Simon KitchingMar 2, 2006 4:51 pm 
Simon KitchingMar 2, 2006 5:03 pm 
Noel J. BergmanMar 2, 2006 5:16 pm 
Henri YandellMar 2, 2006 5:26 pm 
Sandy McArthurMar 2, 2006 5:54 pm 
James CarmanMar 2, 2006 6:08 pm 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 6:38 pm 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 6:45 pm 
Rahul AkolkarMar 2, 2006 6:49 pm 
Martin CooperMar 2, 2006 6:50 pm 
Subject:Re: [feedparser] News / Status
From:Simon Kitching (skit@apache.org)
Date:Mar 2, 2006 4:51:32 pm
List:org.apache.commons.dev

On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 18:02 -0500, Rahul Akolkar wrote:

On 3/2/06, Simon Kitching <skit@apache.org> wrote: <snip/>

We should probably be more careful about what projects are accepted into commons.

<snap/>

Agreed, but how do we do that?

On one hand, its too easy to start a project in Commons, and then have the project stall (for a plethora of reasons). OTOH, our charter says the sandbox is fairly "open". Needs some objective definition if we're going to be selective (such as saying something to the effect of your sentence below and then standing firm).

Well, maybe we just should emphasise that it's not a "failure" for a project to start in the sandbox then move to Sourceforge or similar.

Hopefully projects in the sandbox *do* gather a solid team of developers who are already apache committers, in which case promotion to proper and support for real releases isn't a problem. However projects that are a success technically, but don't gather the necessary community *can* and *should* move elsewhere rather than be regarded as a "failure".

From this point of view, it was the promotion of FeedParser to proper

without the necessary community support that was the only mistake made. Kevin Burton perhaps thought that commons was Sourceforge under a different name which it isn't.

* IMO, the recent vote for [logging] is not a good example. It appears there was confusion about the alpha labeling. I think most of us use JCL one way or the other, that single vote may not be a good indication of developer/voter/community support.

* I'd also like to think that Digester can make a maintenance release the next time it comes up. I use it, and I know many others here use it too.

I hope so too!

Cheers,

Simon