On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I don't have a binding vote, but my thoughts..... > > (one more thing you MIGHT want to consider is contacting the 100+ > committer/PMC members and finding which could be made emeritus to cut down > the > list a little bit) > > On Wednesday 14 April 2010 11:08:17 pm Glen Daniels wrote: > > Hey y'all, > > > > So as per my earlier mail to the dev lists, we need to talk about... > > > > * Which subprojects should be promoted to TLPs? > > * Which subprojects should be migrated to the Attic? > > * What should the structure look like for what remains? > > > > Here's what we've got to work with. > > > > 1. Axiom (commons) > > 2. Neethi (commons) > > 3. XmlSchema (commons) > > 4. Tcpmon (commons) > > 5. Guththila (commons) > > 6. JaxMe > > 7. jUDDI > > 8. Scout > > 9. Muse > > 10.Woden > > 11.WSIF > > 12.WSS4J > > 13.XMLRPC > > > > Let's talk Attic first. It seems WSIF and Muse have been pretty much > > inactive for some time now, so I'd propose we get the ball rolling with > > proposals to Attic both of those. JaxMe also seems ripe for the Attic. > > That makes sense to me. > > > > I think that it's pretty clear jUDDI and Scout should migrate together to > a > > new TLP, Apache jUDDI, with Kurt as chair. Thoughts? > > +1 > > > > Does anyone outside of Axis2/C use Guththila? If not, I'd suggest that > > migrate to Axis. > > +1 > > > > Is there enough activity on XMLRPC to keep it alive? Jochen? > > As long as there are people using it that may require some fixes or support > and someone is willing to support them if required, keeping it in WS for > now > is probably OK. There was another project (Excalibur) that recently > discussed this and came to the same conclusion. > > > Personally, I'd probably prefer to leave Axiom, Neethi, XmlSchema, and > > Tcpmon as subprojects of WS. I'd like to get rid of the "commons" layer, > > though, since I think the "new" WS project should itself be a set of > > commonly useful WS components. > > +1 > > > I know other ideas have been discussed for > > the commons stuff, so let's start that discussion and get the various > > opinions out on the table? > > > > That leaves Woden and WSS4J. Maybe Woden should stay in WS? > > +1 > + 1 to keep Woden under WS. Also I think it's time to modify WS PMC after these changes. Thanks, > > > As for WSS4J, I'm not sure if it should stay or become a TLP. > > So... what do you guys think? > > Hmmm... I don't think there really is enough there for TLP. Another > "idea" > MAY be to merge it into Santuario with the thought that a closer > collaboration > with the lower level libraries may yield some interesting results. That > said, I don't think the Santuario community is exactly the most healthy at > this point either so definitely a concern about that as well. I guess > keeping it in WS makes sense. > > > -- > Daniel Kulp > [email protected] > http://dankulp.com/blog > -- Sagara Gunathunga Blog - http://ssagara.blogspot.com Web - http://people.apache.org/~sagara/
