+1 (non-binding). On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Siegfried Göschl < siegfried.goes...@it20one.com> wrote:
> Hi folks, > > +1 for going TLP (non-binding) > > And the luck for Luc :-) > > Siegfried Goeschl > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > Von: "Luc Maisonobe" <l...@spaceroots.org> > An: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Januar 2016 11:58:47 > Betreff: Re: [math] TLP > > Hi Phil, > > Le 14/01/2016 01:50, Phil Steitz a écrit : > > I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top level > > project at the ASF. This has been proposed before, and I have > > always come down on the side of staying in Commons, but I am now > > convinced that it is a good step for us to take for the following > > reasons: > > > > 0) We have several committers who are really only interested in > > [math], so being on the Commons PMC does not really make sense for them > > 1) The code base has swollen in size to well beyond the "small sharp > > tools" that make up the bulk of Commons > > 2) We are probably at the point where we should consider splitting > > [math] itself into separately released subcomponents (could be done > > in Commons, but starts smelling a little Jakarta-ish when Commons > > has components with subcomponents). > > > > The downsides are > > a) [newPMC] loses Commons eyeballs / contributors who would not find > > us otherwise > > b) Migration / repackaging pain > > c) Overhead of starting and managing a PMC > > d) Other Commons components lose some eyeballs > > > > Personally, I think the benefits outweigh the downsides at this > > point. New better tools and ASF processes have made b) and c) a > > little less onerous. I don't think d) is really a big problem for > > Commons, as those of us who work on other stuff here could continue > > to do so. It is possible that a) actually works in the reverse > > direction - i.e., we are easier to find as a TLP. > > > > What do others think about this? > > I also think it is now time for us to grow up and leave parents home. > [math] has become big, really big by now. It looks more like a > standalone autonomous project than a shared component. Since a few > years, it started to becomes a singular component, not really > similar to the others. We almost monopolize the bandwidth on the > mailing list, which can be painful for non-math developers. > > I think going TLP could also allow us to do somes things differently, > perhaps experimenting on less stringent constraints about releases, > mainly related to stuff that is not stabilized. We could also accept > some ideas that were rejected up to now as not fitting in commons > scope (higher level stuff like the expression parser that was submitted > twice by different people if I remember well). > > So +1 for going TLP. > > best regards, > Luc > > > > > Phil > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
