Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-14 Thread Henri Yandell
+1 to Phil's +1 meaning. :) On Monday, October 14, 2013, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 10/14/13 9:18 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > > The nice thing about Hen's solution is, that I expect it to be better > > structured. When 20 people begin voting on 30 different components it > will > > get confusing in

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-14 Thread Phil Steitz
On 10/14/13 9:18 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > The nice thing about Hen's solution is, that I expect it to be better > structured. When 20 people begin voting on 30 different components it will > get confusing in that thread. Having one single file which contains the > result of the vote would be ve

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-14 Thread Benedikt Ritter
The nice thing about Hen's solution is, that I expect it to be better structured. When 20 people begin voting on 30 different components it will get confusing in that thread. Having one single file which contains the result of the vote would be very easy. How do you want to reach non commons commi

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-14 Thread Phil Steitz
On 10/14/13 2:04 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > Wearing my old Attic fart hat - something is dead when there is no one left > to turn the light out. Something is inactive when it couldn't pass a vote > to keep the project alive (ie: 3 +1s). > > So that's one way to do this. Make a file in SVN. Put each

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-14 Thread Henri Yandell
Wearing my old Attic fart hat - something is dead when there is no one left to turn the light out. Something is inactive when it couldn't pass a vote to keep the project alive (ie: 3 +1s). So that's one way to do this. Make a file in SVN. Put each component in it (include the sandbox perhaps). Ask

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-11 Thread Ate Douma
On 10/10/2013 03:31 PM, James Carman wrote: We definitely need to make sure our naming scheme will work with maven properly. Hopefully commons-foo:1.0 would supercede commons-foo:1.0-M1. Again, I really don't care what we call it, as long as we manage expectations and don't dork up maven. Sin

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-10 Thread Oliver Heger
Am 09.10.2013 21:17, schrieb Benedikt Ritter: > Hi, > > I think Phil came up with the idea to try to focus on the components that > we are able to maintain and put all other stuff to dormant. Here is the > list of components that I think really are proper: > > - CLI > - Codec > - Collections > -

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread Rahul Akolkar
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Ate Douma wrote: > I've move this into a separate [DISCUSS] thread as I think it needs separate > discussion. > > Jörg gave some objections below about using Milestone releases, as I > proposed earlier to support releasing intermediate versions of a > not-yet-staba

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread Gary Gregory
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:00 AM, James Carman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: >> I think "milestone" releases works if you have a clear development >> plan and schedule. I've never seen it be the case in Commons. Calling >> "releases" to Maven and dist, Alphas and Be

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread James Carman
We definitely need to make sure our naming scheme will work with maven properly. Hopefully commons-foo:1.0 would supercede commons-foo:1.0-M1. Again, I really don't care what we call it, as long as we manage expectations and don't dork up maven. On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Ate Douma wrote:

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread Ate Douma
On 10/10/2013 03:00 PM, James Carman wrote: On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: I think "milestone" releases works if you have a clear development plan and schedule. I've never seen it be the case in Commons. Calling "releases" to Maven and dist, Alphas and Betas make more sens

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread James Carman
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > I think "milestone" releases works if you have a clear development > plan and schedule. I've never seen it be the case in Commons. Calling > "releases" to Maven and dist, Alphas and Betas make more sense for us > IMO. > I don't care what we c

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread Gary Gregory
I think "milestone" releases works if you have a clear development plan and schedule. I've never seen it be the case in Commons. Calling "releases" to Maven and dist, Alphas and Betas make more sense for us IMO. Gary On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Ate Douma wrote: > I've move this into a separ

Re: [DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread James Carman
I'm okay with alpha/milestone/rc/whatever. Do we promote them to central or leave them local? Keeping them in-house might help keep folks from incorporating them into production code. However I'm okay with publishing too. Hibernate has done this for years (rc's). On Thursday, October 10, 2013,

[DISCUSS] Allow unstable 0.x OR -Milestone releases [Was: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant]

2013-10-10 Thread Ate Douma
I've move this into a separate [DISCUSS] thread as I think it needs separate discussion. Jörg gave some objections below about using Milestone releases, as I proposed earlier to support releasing intermediate versions of a not-yet-stabalized component. While I understand his problems with un

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-10 Thread Benedikt Ritter
I like the idea of releasing 0.x versions. A good example is [csv]. I would have no problem with releasing the current trunk as 0.9. At the moment [csv] is just another component we don't releaese because we want to come up with a perfect API (and I take responsibility for that :-) Benedikt Se

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-10 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi, Ate Douma wrote: > On 10/10/2013 12:24 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: >> Every now and then I keep getting requests via private mail asking to >> release javaflow as it seems to be working for people. Yet I know there >> is still so much essential stuff to fix for a 1.0 release. >> >> Crossing over

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-10 Thread Ate Douma
On 10/10/2013 12:24 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: Every now and then I keep getting requests via private mail asking to release javaflow as it seems to be working for people. Yet I know there is still so much essential stuff to fix for a 1.0 release. Crossing over to the other thread: I know on githu

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Dan Tran
I am a active VFS user wishing to have an official VFS 2.1 release :-) Sorry about the noise. -Dan On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Jörg Schaible > wrote: > > Dan Tran wrote: > > > >> VFS has no release for a couple of years. Would you c

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Torsten Curdt
Every now and then I keep getting requests via private mail asking to release javaflow as it seems to be working for people. Yet I know there is still so much essential stuff to fix for a 1.0 release. Crossing over to the other thread: I know on github I would made a 0.x release already ages ago b

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Gary Gregory
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Dan Tran wrote: > >> VFS has no release for a couple of years. Would you consider it as proper? > > Just because there was no release, does not mean there have been no > development. Check svn if you don't believe. I consider VFS active. I ju

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Adrian Crum
That is a good point. Those Commons GPG commits are just Maven black box updates. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 10/9/2013 1:28 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Here is some commit activity: http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?view=plot&from=20130101&to

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Jörg Schaible
Dan Tran wrote: > VFS has no release for a couple of years. Would you consider it as proper? Just because there was no release, does not mean there have been no development. Check svn if you don't believe. - Jörg - To unsubsc

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Christian Grobmeier
Here is some commit activity: http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?view=plot&from=20130101&to=20131009&path=%2Fcommons%2Fproper&plotsort=%24plotsort But we should to exclude "typo" fixes and such. For example: http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?view=resultlist&from=201301

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Phil Steitz
On 10/9/13 12:17 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > I think Phil came up with the idea to try to focus on the components that > we are able to maintain and put all other stuff to dormant. Here is the > list of components that I think really are proper: > > - CLI > - Codec > - Collections > - Comp

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Benedikt Ritter
This isn't really an analysis. This is just the list of components that belong to proper to me. If you thing that something is missing (for what ever reason) feel free to add it. It's not like we're putting everything directly to dormant that's not on the list. I just wanted to get a discussion sta

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Adrian Crum
Can we include commit activity and Jira activity in the analysis? Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 10/9/2013 1:04 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: I've looked at all the proper components and listed all components where I've seen activity since I'm subscribed to the ML.

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Benedikt Ritter
I've looked at all the proper components and listed all components where I've seen activity since I'm subscribed to the ML. 2013/10/9 Adrian Crum > What criteria are you using to come up with this list? > > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > > On 10/9/2013 12:17 P

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Adrian Crum
What criteria are you using to come up with this list? Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 10/9/2013 12:17 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Hi, I think Phil came up with the idea to try to focus on the components that we are able to maintain and put all other stuff to dorman

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Matt Benson
Agreed, there are folks working on [pool] and [dbcp] pretty recently, Mark Thomas and Bill Speirs off the top of my head. Matt On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Pool and dbcp sounds ok for proper imo > Le 9 oct. 2013 21:20, "Dan Tran" a écrit : > > > VFS has no releas

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
Pool and dbcp sounds ok for proper imo Le 9 oct. 2013 21:20, "Dan Tran" a écrit : > VFS has no release for a couple of years. Would you consider it as proper? > > -D > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Benedikt Ritter > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I think Phil came up with the idea to try to foc

Re: [DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Dan Tran
VFS has no release for a couple of years. Would you consider it as proper? -D On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi, > > I think Phil came up with the idea to try to focus on the components that > we are able to maintain and put all other stuff to dormant. Here is the >

[DISCUSS] Putting several unmaintained components to dormant

2013-10-09 Thread Benedikt Ritter
Hi, I think Phil came up with the idea to try to focus on the components that we are able to maintain and put all other stuff to dormant. Here is the list of components that I think really are proper: - CLI - Codec - Collections - Compress - Configuration - CSV - Daemon - DBCP (?) - Email - Funct