On 8 Oct 2013, at 6:53, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Hi
Not sure svn is the issue. What makes quality and which rules are
mandatory
is more important IMO.
If you want to attract a new generation it is important. Would you
contribute to a CVS project?
I would if you need it urgently for work.
My point was just the quality is not the issue of commons so not the first
thing to do/move
Le 8 oct. 2013 07:05, "James Ring" a écrit :
> In my experience quality is greatly enhanced by code review. Whatever
> we can do to have gerrit-style code review, let's do that IMO.
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013
In my experience quality is greatly enhanced by code review. Whatever
we can do to have gerrit-style code review, let's do that IMO.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Not sure svn is the issue. What makes quality and which rules are mandatory
> is more important I
Hi
Not sure svn is the issue. What makes quality and which rules are mandatory
is more important IMO.
Following oracle java version (with a single one late - java 6 when java 7
is the current one) is one key i think.
Another one would be to remove project from main sources/proper when nobody
nee
Whatever workflow we came up with, if we moved to Git I'd like to see
Gerritt (https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/) used for code review.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 7:10 PM, James Carman wrote:
> All,
>
> If we did want to move to Git, we'd probably have to figure out how
> we'd manage our "workflow" (
All,
If we did want to move to Git, we'd probably have to figure out how
we'd manage our "workflow" (couldn't think of a better word). I
suppose we'd have a separate repo for each component? What about
proper vs. sandbox? How would we accommodate that paradigm? Has
anyone else already gone thr
On 10/07/2013 11:59 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On Oct 7, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 07/10/2013 20:30, Phil Steitz a écrit :
Great. We give sandbox commit to any ASF committer. Reply with
your availIds and we can get that done immediately. Commit to
commons proper requires a
On 10/07/2013 10:40 PM, Juan Antonio Breña Moral wrote:
Hi,
I am working with SCXML for HFSM with EV3 Robots.
https://github.com/jabrena/liverobots
Very nice!
I would like to collaborate.
Any ideas you have floating, bring them on!
All help is appreciated.
Now, Apache Commons SCXML is ru
> On Oct 7, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
> Le 07/10/2013 20:30, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>
>> Great. We give sandbox commit to any ASF committer. Reply with
>> your availIds and we can get that done immediately. Commit to
>> commons proper requires a little more process, but we ca
Le 07/10/2013 20:30, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> Great. We give sandbox commit to any ASF committer. Reply with
> your availIds and we can get that done immediately. Commit to
> commons proper requires a little more process, but we can get that
> done easily assuming you want to join us as committe
On 10/06/2013 09:44 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> James,
>
> thank you.
>
> I believe Commons is in a bad shape.
>
> Look at Commons Collections. Before 4 years somebody
> said Guava is more modern, he his answer seems to be widely accepted.
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/167/690771
> This
On 10/07/2013 08:14 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hi,
since we have discussed a lot of different aspects, it may be time to sum
things up a bit (please correct me or add things I've missed):
Release Management - Releases take too long
- Build is overly complex
- dependencies to parent pom seem to
Hi,
I am working with SCXML for HFSM with EV3 Robots.
https://github.com/jabrena/liverobots
I would like to collaborate.
Now, Apache Commons SCXML is running in a ARM9 with good performance.
Cheers
On 10/07/2013 10:23 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
On 10/07/2013 09:52 PM, Juan Antonio Breña Moral wro
On 10/7/13 1:20 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 10/07/2013 08:30 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 10/7/13 7:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>> Hi SCXML developers/community,
>>>
>>> We are trying to figure out what the status and activity of SCXML
>>> development is, and and/or who in the community might be
>>> int
On 10/07/2013 09:52 PM, Juan Antonio Breña Moral wrote:
Hi Great Idea.
In my case I could test software and contribute a bit.
Great to hear!
Are you currently active user of SCXML?
I'd love to hear in what context, what version, etc.
I surely welcome your offer to test and contribute!
Thanks,
I don't see any reason why SCXML can't be "demoted" to the sandbox
since it basically has no community right now. What say you, folks?
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 10/07/2013 08:30 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>
>> On 10/7/13 7:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi SCXML develop
On 10/07/2013 08:30 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/7/13 7:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
Hi SCXML developers/community,
We are trying to figure out what the status and activity of SCXML
development is, and and/or who in the community might be
interested in re-activating it.
From the mailing lists and
Hi Benedikt,
On 10/07/2013 07:44 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hello Ate,
we are going through some discussions at the moment about how we want to
organize development at commons in the future [1].
I'm aware of it as I've been subscribed to this list for several months.
So far only lurking but n
Hi Great Idea.
In my case I could test software and contribute a bit.
Juan Antonio
On 10/07/2013 08:30 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/7/13 7:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
Hi SCXML developers/community,
We are trying to figure out what the status and activity of SCXML
development is, and and/or who i
On 10/7/13 7:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
> Hi SCXML developers/community,
>
> We are trying to figure out what the status and activity of SCXML
> development is, and and/or who in the community might be
> interested in re-activating it.
>
> From the mailing lists and JIRA activity we gather not much ha
Hi,
since we have discussed a lot of different aspects, it may be time to sum
things up a bit (please correct me or add things I've missed):
Release Management - Releases take too long
- Build is overly complex
- dependencies to parent pom seem to be unclear
- to few releases (more releases may a
Hello Ate,
we are going through some discussions at the moment about how we want to
organize development at commons in the future [1].
We are always looking for people that want to contribute so I see no reason
why you shouldn't dig right into the code.
Regarding the reviewing: I don't now the SC
Hi SCXML developers/community,
We are trying to figure out what the status and activity of SCXML development
is, and and/or who in the community might be interested in re-activating it.
From the mailing lists and JIRA activity we gather not much has been happening
here for a very long time: t
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
> We discuss magic strings in the sandbox. Why? We don't need to discuss that.
> Before we release we can simply check Sonar. Safe the time to discuss. Fix
> it or leave it to Sonar to report it.
>
+1! This sort of behavior definitely
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On 7 Oct 2013, at 13:58, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Christian Grobmeier > >wrote:
>>
>> What would be the difference to now?
>>>
>>>
>>> The difference can be *huge*, emotionally. For example, I felt qu
On 7 Oct 2013, at 13:58, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
What would be the difference to now?
The difference can be *huge*, emotionally. For example, I felt quite
at
home at the webservices project when working in JaxMe, XML-RPC, or
Axis.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> What would be the difference to now?
>
>
The difference can be *huge*, emotionally. For example, I felt quite at
home at the webservices project when working in JaxMe, XML-RPC, or Axis.
OTOH, I feel completely isolated, since ws-commons
On 7 Oct 2013, at 12:58, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
Hi Jochen,
Well summarized.
And I think you figured out what the real problem is.
We could work as in Incubator, isn't it?
Having one big umbrella and real subprojects.
What would be the difference to now?
I understand Commons as a project
+1
Le 7 oct. 2013 12:58, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO" a écrit :
> Hi Jochen,
>
> Well summarized.
> And I think you figured out what the real problem is.
>
> We could work as in Incubator, isn't it?
> Having one big umbrella and real subprojects.
>
>
>
> JLouis
>
>
> 2013/10/7 Jochen Wiedmann
>
> > I b
Hi Jochen,
Well summarized.
And I think you figured out what the real problem is.
We could work as in Incubator, isn't it?
Having one big umbrella and real subprojects.
JLouis
2013/10/7 Jochen Wiedmann
> I believe that the problem is Commons structure. To have one big project
> which such
Document what you can hold, so that there isn't overly much promise.
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> over this weekend I added 7z support to the compress antlib which I also
> like to use as a second testbed for Commons Compress - I even found a
> bug for a
I believe that the problem is Commons structure. To have one big project
which such a lot of subprojects blocks building a small community. You're
not supposed to be a part of the small subproject, but the big community
"Commons". While the former would be appealing for a newcomer, the latter
just
Hi all,
Le 06/10/2013 21:44, Christian Grobmeier a écrit :
> James,
>
> thank you.
>
> I believe Commons is in a bad shape.
>
> Look at Commons Collections. Before 4 years somebody
> said Guava is more modern, he his answer seems to be widely accepted.
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/167/69077
33 matches
Mail list logo
