On 5/15/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Ok, I've followed the commons TLP vote thread with some interest
because it seems to impact directly on the end-game for Jakarta.
I believe that we have to make some pretty fundamental decisions about
that future before we can fully resolve the commons TLP issues.
0/ Do we agree that the end-game is dissolution of the Jakarta PMC and
closure of the project?
Pro - Draws a line under the reorg effort which has gone on for 3 or
4 *years*.
Con - Removes the remaining tangible & historic links between former
Jakarta sub-projects.
1/ If so do we wish to preserve the Jakarta brand? (the website and
possibly general@)
Pro - As Ted H. says "We should stop thinking of "Jakarta" only as
an entity, and go back to thinking of it as to the ASF synonym for
"Java", as originally intended."
With this thought in mind around 10% of the referrals to
james.apache come from jakarta.apache.
Con - Others consider that the effort of maintaining the resources
would be unacceptable to anyone.
2/ If we believe that the brand should be preserved should the commons
TLP take ownership of the brand (if/when Jakarta PMC is dissolved)
Pro - Commons is an active community which continues to fulfil the
jakarta==java remit.
Con - Commons is not necessarily interested in the brand or
maintenance of its resources. (would people from other projects step
up)
3/ If we believe that a commons TLP should not own the brand are any
of the alternative options acceptable?
- Retain the Jakarta PMC solely to maintain the brand
- Move ownership of the brand to the prc (should they agree to have it)
- Move ownership of the brand to projects.apache maintainers
x/ Should we consult more widely the Members and/or the Board?
My own (2c) opinion is that:
0/ Yes dissolve the jakarta pmc
1/ Yes preserve the brand
2/ If commons PMC would be comfortable with this it would be my
preferred choice, *and* it would resolve the naming issue because the
project could be "Jakarta Commons" which is a minor change from the
sub-project name Jakarta/Commons
3/ If commons PMC would be against this then I think we should approach
the prc.
x/ Don't know
In essence are we in favour of a revolutionary end or an evolutionary one?
WDYT?
d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello to everybody,
my personal opinion differes slightly.
I still believe that we have to preserve Jakarta as a project summoning the
Java
projects in the foundation. If you ask me directly "Do we need another
Jakartas
like for .NET for instance?" - I would say yes. Those new Jakarta, or
"Nairobi" or
whatever we decide to call it has to be a TLP, and has to have a commons
project,
and has to have a PMC and everything else. Then,part of our current .NET
projects
could be transfered to the .NET-commons one.
Actually I have been following the mail lists for more than three years by
now, although
I am part of the Jakarta project for less than three months, so you
don't need to consider
my thoughts seriosly.
I am curious to hear what Martin van den Bemt has to say, as I know he is
going to
lead a presentation on the ApacheCON USA with the exact same name.
Have a nice day.
--
Regards, Petar!
Karlovo, Bulgaria.
Public PGP Key at:
http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9
Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9
