Johann, Sounds good. I did end up checking out the SIS code and it looks really interesting. I can definitely picture commons-geometry in there. It would be a good chance to introduce some cool new features in the library, such as vector buffers of some sort, new file format readers/writers, and new algorithms. I'd be willing to help out with that when you're ready.
Regards, Matt J On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 4:03 AM Johann Sorel via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi. > > > > Le ven. 20 févr. 2026 à 14:20, Elliotte Rusty Harold > > <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 3:58 AM Gilles Sadowski <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> Le jeu. 19 févr. 2026 à 14:57, Johann Sorel via dev > >>> I agree: Collaboration on reusable code is a better way. > >> > >> I agree too. This has two prerequisites: > >> > >> 1. Reusable code > >> 2. Collaboration > >> > >> Neither of those is easy to satisfy nor should either be assumed. > >> Reusable code is probably the easier one to guarantee. You just need > >> to find at least three existing projects that already have code doing > >> the thing you're proposing to write a library for. You have one. There > >> could be others. > >> > >> Collaboration is much tougher. You need active developers who are > >> willing to contribute over the lifetime of the project. Even if you > >> have them today, you could lose them tomorrow. Code that you > >> contribute to a different project instead of your own will now be > >> blocked on the availability of reviewers and might not be released for > >> years, if ever. This is where Apache Xerces is currently stuck, for > >> example. > >> > >> Genuinely reusable code is helpful, but splitting your own work into > >> separate parts in separate projects owned by different teams, people, > >> and organizations is a very risky strategy. The presumption should be > >> not to do this. Good evidence of benefit is needed before I would > >> attempt that. > > These are all real questions which we should tackle. > > It's depressing that we've been asking them for years, without coming > > up with anything but "collaboration is too complicated", even between > > ASF projects. Even more frustrating is that AFAIK, the "Commons" > > project was originally started to do just that! For a long time, we've > been > > totally open to committers from other ASF projects; yet no synergy has > > ever emerged (as far as I remember correctly). > > > > I hope that it will be different this time. [Thank you, Johann, for > reaching > > out.] > > > No problem, but we are not there yet :). > > On my side I also have to make sure it would be okay with the other PMC > and with my boss. > And see how much regular time I can be allowed to work on this. > So don't get your hopes up to much, this is not something we planned to > do this year. > > My questions were to check the state of those libraries and if it would > be worth it. > > > Johann > > > > > > > Regards, > > Gilles > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
