On Jun 18, 2016 2:05 PM, "Gilles" <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 11:00:34 -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> I'm asking, again, whether I need to initiate a VOTE that would allow me
>>> to set up a workspace ("git", etc.) and transfer some code from CM over
>>> there.
>>>
>>
>> Nothing is stopping you from setting something up. Github is usually the
>> easiest way.
>>
>> It doesn't sound like that is what you want, however. I don't understand
>> why not.
>
>
> And I don't understand that Apache would indeed prefer that code be forked
> rather than evolved here...
>
>
>>> It may be that incubation is a good thing for Commons Math, but it
doesn't
>>>>
>>>> seem valid to say that incubation is necessary because CM is being
kicked
>>>> out of Commons.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Never said so.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm... I must have misunderstood the comment about CM not being
interested
>> in hosting "these components".
>
>
> Commons is NOT interested in hosting the new components.
> That much was made clear in Matt Benson's last post. [Maybe not
cross-posted
> to the incubator's ML.]
>
I am one person. Personally I don't understand what is so offensive to you
about retaining a hierarchical level between Commons and math-focused
artifacts; I simply feel that a preponderance of math-focused components
dilutes the Commons "brand."
br,
Matt
>
>>> There is a confusion here: *I* say that CM is dead.
>>>
>>
>> Strong words. Such statements are often frustrating to others.
>
>
> Not strong, just factual.
>
> Maybe it will be revived in the future.
> Until then, I proposed to *do* something while the others seem to only
> want to wait.
> Strange that the latter proposal seems more acceptable than mine.
>
>
>> It does
>> sound like the community has dwindled, perhaps beyond repair.
>
>
> It sure sounds like it.
> In fewer words: CM is dead.
>
>
>> The development situation *will* change because the context *has* changed
>>>
>>> (unsupported code). CM cannot go on as it did before the fork.
>>>
>>
>> You can never go home. No project stays the same.
>
>
> Well, some people in CM for years did their best to avoid change.
> I didn't like that view and argue with them because they were
> important contributors to CM.
>
> I still have to argue, but now with non-contributors.
> *This* makes no sense.
>
>
>>> Everybody (developers, users, Commons PMC) would be better off with a
>>> selected set of new (supported) components because this is something we
>>> can easily do *now* (RERO, etc.).
>>>
>>
>> This was your assertion in the long email thread. It seemed that there
was
>> significant counter-positions.
>
>
> By non-contributors, using arguments that do not fit the CM history.
>
>
>>> I'm OK to go through the incubator to do that; but I don't see that it
>>> is an easier path. Surely it looks longer. And it seems that even the
>>> incubator people doubt that it will lead anywhere.
>>>
>>
>> The incubator is for building community and adapting to Apache. If you
>> don't have a seed community, then incubator is the wrong place. You need
to
>> have more than just you.
>
>
> That's fair, but there are a few others; that was mentioned.
>
>
>>>
>>> Given the uncertain outcome, going through the incubator would be an
>>> attempt at rethinking the development of the currently unsupported
>>> code. See e.g.
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-172
>>> [Or is that out of scope for an incubation proposal?]
>>
>>
>>
>> Incubator is not a place to rethink code. It is primarily for building
>> community.
>
>
> I thought so.
> So, that leaves us with TLP. Back to square one.
>
>
>
> Gilles
>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:51:36 -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Excuse me?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See inline.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org
>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:01:13 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought this had been made clear. Several months Commons voted to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> make Math a TLP. But shortly after that most of the people involved
>>>>>>>> with Commons Math felt that a TLP at the ASF would not work for
them,
>>>>>>>> so they forked the project and left, effectively voiding the TLP
vote
>>>>>>>> since the proposed PMC is no longer valid. There is one person
left
>>>>>>>> who was very involved in Commons Math and a few other people who
have
>>>>>>>> expressed interest in joining the new community.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So this is a situation where we have an already existing code base
>>>>>>>> where a lot of the people left are not familiar with quite a bit of
>>>>>>>> it. The new group of people who are interested are trying to
>>>>>>>> determine how they should move forward. There is some talk of
breaking
>>>>>>>> Commons Math into smaller components and possibly dropping some
where
>>>>>>>> there is no one to maintain it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "Commons" project not being interested in hosting those
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> components,
>>>>>>> is the "incubator" a good place for the developers wishing to go in
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> direction?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps before we move to next steps, could you provide some links
to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> discussion where it was decided that Commons is not interested in
>>>>>> hosting
>>>>>> these components?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I proposed to concretely examine this possibility in more than
>>>>> one message:
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/ye6wvqvlvnqe4qrp
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/3gupcednhqtcfepw
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/3kob7djjicax6rgn
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/7rb2mxq7hhwzykvr
>>>>>
>>>>> And again in another thread:
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/fnlta2ttfne3aj5f
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the next step?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's get to a common understanding of what went before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Even that seems impossible. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gilles
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
