Hello.
On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:58:40 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Jochen,
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Jörg Schaible
<joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> wrote:
That depends. If some packages of the current CM should stay as own
component in Commons, these packages have to be identified.
Whoever would support such a lunacy? Either CM moves entirely, or
not at
all.
It's not that clear-cut.
Thank you (and James, and Niall) for keeping the ball moving, at a
point where I was thinking that the game was over. However, we should
all realize that it's not because that all those codes were developed
within a single repository that they all belong together.
[We got into this dire situation because so much code _depended_
(however
people here want to put it differently) on one or two people.
And it's not a size problem, per se; it's that it covers a very broad
scope, requiring expertise levels that are rarely found in one person,
even less so in a person who'd dedicated (him)herself to maintaining a
Java library. A TLP is something to attempt but I'm not optimistic
that
we'll get much more traction.]
By having some of the functionality severed from CM, it _increases_ the
likelihood that it will be used and contributed to.
And if this functionality is actually "mature", then it won't have to
be (fakely) upgraded (through changing of package name) just because
some other (non-mature) code would need it (to allow breaking changes).
By way of consequence, such "split off" code will fulfill the Commons'
promise of stability.
In turn, the separation will have positive effects on the prospective
TLP, if just by not having to deal with issues thus become
"out-of-scope".
There may well be interactions between the TLP and Commons whenever the
TLP would choose to depend on a Commons component, but there will be
clear API boundaries.
If the new Commons Components have been identified, we can have a
vote. Then
we'll see what the majority want. All I can say now is that we have
currenty
no consensus about anything. Some of the stuff in CM is certainly
common
enough to build a valid Commons component.
At last, we agree on this! [That was my main point since day one (June
5).]
Instead of readily discussing the consequence of that observation, we
fought
about "micro-management" of Commons Math... :-(
I'll start a VOTE thread for each new Commons component candidate.
Gilles
Cheers,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
