On Apr 23, 2004, at 5:49 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Guys,Hi Berin,
I'm going to vote -1 here, until the status file is updated addressing some of the original concerns.
Andrew Oliver raised a specific point [1] that the Java PMC wanted the incubator to specifically consider community.
Also, have a look at some of the e-mail in :
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/SearchList? listId=&listName=general%40incubator.apache.org&searchText=pluto&defaul tField=subject&Search=Search
Guys - I'm quite sure that all the concerns *have* been addressed, and an updated status file will cover all of them. At which point I'll gladly change this to a +1.
I also suspect that others in the PMC have more visibility than I, but we are being quite hard on other projects in incubation, and I believe we need to be consistent.
Cheers, Berin
[1] http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgId=792503
Let me try to address the issues from the above link below:
Please note that my support is based on the following assumptions:
1. all spec/seed code will be released (this, in my opinion, must be
done prior to consideration) If thats not till March, then the project
can't reasonably be considered until March. (We don't take on other
closed source projects)
All code is in Apache CVS. Absolutely nothing is closed. All in the open. Yup.
2. David Taylor and the other committee members will soon be
released from the Non-Disclosure agreements they are currently under so
that they can participate freely. (You can't have a community based on a
closed spec where the members can't speak freely).
We can all speak freely and we won't get in that situation again.
With the public release of the Portlet Specification last year, there is nothing now that isn't already public.
3. I'm assuming that others including from the Jetspeed and
Cocoon-portal will go add themselves as committers...
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?PlutoProposal - I will send
an invitation out.
All Jetspeed and Cocoon committers had the opportunity to join Pluto. Many Jetspeed committers did decide to join the Pluto team.
4. The project will keep compatibilty with the spec but we'll be
free to expand beyond it in much the same way Tomcat and other projects
do. Xerces, for instance, doesn't solely implement just SAX and JAXP
with a parser under it. From a performance standpoint, SAX interfaces
would be nice, having them in the RI (extending the spec) would serve
this purpose.
The project has already started to expand quite healthily.
For example, David DeWolf, a Pluto committer, has started a Kuiper branch.
Its a refactored experimental implementation of the portal based on COP
5. Future revisions of the Spec will happen in the open.
I give my word as an Apache committer that I will work hard, and already have believe me, towards making this situation (of a closed spec) never happen again.
Please note, I REALLY want to see this at Apache, so this is not a
fillibuster intended to kill the effort to be followed by a series of
Catch-22 arguments (here, but not there, which means it can't be here).
But I don't feel the participants should be given a free pass into
Apache to create non community-based non-open projects just to get the
feather. If this is going to be an Apache project, it does need to be an
Apache project. If there is motivation on everyone's part, we CAN
obviously fix these issues by addressing them head-on in an honest and
straightforward manner.
I DO want to particpate, and I DO want to see this happen, but lets do the community thing. We can certainly resolve these issues if all parties are motivated.
-AndrewCOliver
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
