On Sep 16, 2009, at 4:32 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Niclas Hedhman
<nic...@hedhman.org> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com>
wrote:
After much thought, I am voting -1 for 1 main reason.
1: From the get-go, this appears headed towards an umbrella project.
Too many ways to justify "yeah, this belongs here" and far too
few ways to justify "nope, this doesn't quite fit in". So
whether TLP or part of Felix (as was the discussion), this appears
too comprehensive.
This comment surprised me enough to read this proposal again, and I
have to agree with Jim. On one hand, the proposal starts out to speak
of "current and future EEG specifications", but then becomes very
blur
of what that really means. Components, not solutions, not a server,
not a framework, but "components" could as Jim points out mean
everything (or at least anything one can stick in a Bundle in OSGi
lingo).
Does it warrants a -1? Yes, I think it does. But considering how many
PMC members are on the roster, I doubt it will stop anything.
-1 from me, until I see a limitation in scope that is
"describable"...
I like the intent, but not the formulation. Look at your current
plans, distill the essence and put that in the proposal.
IMO this is more a graduation issue, rather than something that should
prevent entry to the incubator - since thats when destination is
decided. There are many possible outcomes from that - perhaps some
parts will go to felix and others to a new TLP(s) - but I say lets see
how it works out during graduation rather than shooting it down now.
I agree that the rubber hits the road when graduation, and when there
is a resolution before the board to make this a TLP. However, my
thoughts are that without this concern front-and-center from the get-go,
the podling runs the risk of hitting this roadblock right at the end,
at which point who knows how much impact this may have on it... In other
words, if a podling umbrella attempts to graduate into a TLP umbrella,
it
will likely be shot down. Do we really want to wait until the end to
address this once and for all?
Just my 2c.
PS: BTW, I think it's a great proposal and podling and technically am
a big
+1 on it. My only concern is lack of directed focus...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
