On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:24 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:47 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sunday 13 April 2008 19:30, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> > >
> > > > IMHO the emphasis on committer affiliation is misguided
On Apr 16, 2008, at 6:56 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
There needs to be a balance. And I am satisfied that the Incubator
PMC has been taking the right line on the issue so far, subjective
as the line may be.
FWIW, I also agree. And as a mentor, I think it results in a better
podling/PPMC
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>> 1. the incubator should be concerned about the composition of the
>>> proposed PMC.
> Only that the community will be welcoming to newcomers and not treat the
> ASF community-project as the "company's private project"
Those are prima
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:47 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sunday 13 April 2008 19:30, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> >
> > > IMHO the emphasis on committer affiliation is misguided. overloading
> > > the word diversity was also probably a mistake. maybe we need to focu
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:27 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > That would make the PPMC be about 50% IBM day job and 50% (non IBMers
> or
> > IBM non-day jobers). Can we take it to a private
On Sunday 13 April 2008 19:30, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
IMHO the emphasis on committer affiliation is misguided. overloading
the word diversity was also probably a mistake. maybe we need to focus
on narrower concepts with alternative names.
1. the incubator should be concerned about the comp
I am glad that I brought up the discussion on Tuscany graduation with Bill
Rowe at ApacheConEU 2008. Happy to see this gain momentum and the positive
responses :).
++Vamsi
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 13 April 2008 19:30, Robert Burrell
On Sunday 13 April 2008 19:30, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> IMHO the emphasis on committer affiliation is misguided. overloading
> the word diversity was also probably a mistake. maybe we need to focus
> on narrower concepts with alternative names.
>
> 1. the incubator should be concerned about t
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:27 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would make the PPMC be about 50% IBM day job and 50% (non IBMers or
> IBM non-day jobers). Can we take it to a private list if anyone wants a
> detailed breakdown?
+1
IMO the IPMC is wrong to ask for named affili
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 4/10/08, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > i've be
On 4/10/08, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> wrote:
>
>
> > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > i've been a passive subscriber to the tuscany list for quite a while
> > > now and to me, from the lists, i
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> >
> > i've been a passive subscriber to the tuscany list for quite a while
> > now and to me, from the lists, it feels like an open community
> >
>
> It's been a while since we discu
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
i've been a passive subscriber to the tuscany list for quite a while
now and to me, from the lists, it feels like an open community
It's been a while since we discussed this.
I'm very curious where Tuscany stands - in terms of viably graduating
at this point. The
On 10/24/07, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim,
>
> Thanks for this feedback. I think you raise a good point that one of
> the goals of community building is discovering a community's true
> synergies and strengths and that sometimes the right outcome is not a
> single community. Whe
Jim,
Thanks for this feedback. I think you raise a good point that one of
the goals of community building is discovering a community's true
synergies and strengths and that sometimes the right outcome is not a
single community. Where goals are mis-aligned then a respectful
change of dir
On Oct 23, 2007, at 6:43 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Noel,
I was there when it happened. It was actually the other way
around..Short story, the "independents" had trouble letting anyone
else work or suggest ideas which went against their own mental model
of how things should be. When i argued
Just one example of the community bending over back wards to
accomodate Jim and Jeremy
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg05118.html
Please search for "chianti" in the archives to get the background.
Basically the trunk was abandoned and the revolutionary "fork" was
accepted *JUST*
Noel,
FYI, I could plainly see who was working hard to co-exist and who
wasnt'. IMHO, the people who left clearly did not want to
play/participate. It was sacrilege to do anything that was against
their mental model of things had to work.
My 2 cents.
-- dims
On 10/23/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL
Noel,
I was there when it happened. It was actually the other way
around..Short story, the "independents" had trouble letting anyone
else work or suggest ideas which went against their own mental model
of how things should be. When i argued for a middle path vociferously,
they left.
-- dims
On
Paul Fremantle wrote:
> I think the PPMC needs this sort of concrete feedback.
And perhaps needs to consider that diversity means supporting a broader
community of interests.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
Jim Marino wrote:
> About seven months ago, BEA decided to pursue an alternative
> direction with the other active independents working on SCA
> at the time when our goals diverged from others in the community.
> Speaking for BEA, we made it clear on multiple occasions that
> while we wished Tusca
Matthieu Riou wrote:
> they did welcome enough independent committers while being in the
> incubator
> Attracting a large quantity of independent developers while being
> in the incubator is pretty hard
Yes, but it seems to be emerging that there *were* more independents, and
they have left to w
I would refer people to the
Re: Graduation: how do we check "three or more independent
committers" ?
thread, and message (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
On 10/22/07, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2007, at 2:58 AM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
>
> > Noel
> >
> >> Wouldn't the community be healthier if it focused some effort on
> >> bringing
> > in
> >> independent committers?
> >
> > Its my understanding that the project is very
Thanks for voting. I think the PPMC needs this sort of concrete feedback.
Paul
On 10/22/07, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2007, at 2:58 AM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
>
> > Noel
> >
> >> Wouldn't the community be healthier if it focused some effort on
> >> bringing
> > in
>
On Oct 20, 2007, at 2:58 AM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
Noel
Wouldn't the community be healthier if it focused some effort on
bringing
in
independent committers?
Its my understanding that the project is very focussed on
encouraging new
committers and that this is having results.
In whic
For the record, I am voting -1 on graduation.
I do not feel that Tuscany has sufficient "real" diversity,
at this time, for graduation.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 10/20/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Paul Fremantle wrote:
>
> > > Wouldn't the community be healthier if it focused some effort
> > > on bringing in independent committers?
>
> > Its my understanding that the project is very focussed on encouraging
> > new committers and tha
On Oct 21, 2007, at 10:52 AM, ant elder wrote:
On 10/21/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ant Elder wrote:
Apparently a bare minimum, with very little active work from
independents?
If the bare minimum is the "3 legally independent committers" as
defined
in
the Incubator
On 10/21/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ant Elder wrote:
>
> > > Apparently a bare minimum, with very little active work from
> independents?
>
> > If the bare minimum is the "3 legally independent committers" as defined
> in
> > the Incubator policy documents then Tuscany has m
Ant Elder wrote:
> > Apparently a bare minimum, with very little active work from
independents?
> If the bare minimum is the "3 legally independent committers" as defined
in
> the Incubator policy documents then Tuscany has more than the bare
minimum -
> and thats "active" committers.
Can you co
On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The Tuscany podling respectfully requests the Incubator to consider its
> graduation to a Top Level Project.
>
> While incubating Tuscany has made 14(!) releases, voted in 19 new
> committers, survived conflicts, formed its PPMC, learned how to
On 10/20/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/20/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ...This is the Tuscany community vote result thread which was only on
> the
> > tuscany-dev list but seems to have inadvertently been replied to to the
> > general@ list
>
> B
On 10/19/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Paul Fremantle wrote:
>
> > I think Tuscany is ready to graduate because:
> > 1) I understand it to have met the base requirements of the IPMC in
> terms
> of
> >independent committers
>
> Apparently a bare minimum, with very little ac
The recent Tuscany 1.0 release included Ode integration with an
implementation.bpel component type. We also have experimental support
for integration with Geronimo.
In the last 2 months, 3 new committers have been added, one is in progress
as Paul has said, and one is being discussed. Of these
Noel
There is a vote in progress on a new committer right now. Does that count?
I'm certainly keen on doing integration between Synapse and Tuscany and as
soon as I get a minute I will do it. I agree that cross-fertilization is
good.
Paul
On 10/21/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Fremantle wrote:
> > Wouldn't the community be healthier if it focused some effort
> > on bringing in independent committers?
> Its my understanding that the project is very focussed on encouraging
> new committers and that this is having results.
Where? It seems to me that if it were havi
nt elder wrote:
The Tuscany podling respectfully requests the Incubator to consider its
graduation to a Top Level Project.
While incubating Tuscany has made 14(!) releases, voted in 19 new
committers, survived conflicts, formed its PPMC, learned how to govern
itself, resolved licensing issues an
On 10/20/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...This is the Tuscany community vote result thread which was only on the
> tuscany-dev list but seems to have inadvertently been replied to to the
> general@ list
BTW, that message says
> ...given the muddied waters how about waiting a lit
On 10/19/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Please don't use [RESULT] in a thread that is still on-going. There may
> have been a result in the Tuscany PPMC, but there is no result yet from
> the
> Incubator PMC.
This is the Tuscany community vote result thread which was only on
Noel
>Wouldn't the community be healthier if it focused some effort on bringing
in
>independent committers?
Its my understanding that the project is very focussed on encouraging new
committers and that this is having results.
Paul
--
Paul Fremantle
Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2
O
Please don't use [RESULT] in a thread that is still on-going. There may
have been a result in the Tuscany PPMC, but there is no result yet from the
Incubator PMC.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fo
Paul Fremantle wrote:
> I think Tuscany is ready to graduate because:
> 1) I understand it to have met the base requirements of the IPMC in terms
of
>independent committers
Apparently a bare minimum, with very little active work from independents?
> However, I agree that there is a strong nu
+1 ; )
On 10/18/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hope you've all see whats going on with our vote over on Incubator
> general:
> http://marc.info/?t=11919162302&r=1&w=2
>
> Looks like we've found some words most people are happy with:
>
> "...establish a Project Management Committe
Seems ok with me too.
- Venkat
On 10/17/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Luciano Resende wrote:
>
> > "...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the
> > creation and maintenance of open-source software for distribution
> > at no charge to the public, that simplifies
Folks,
ant elder wrote:
On 10/17/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wonder if we could shorten this just a little. How about:
"...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation
and maintenance of open-source software for distribution at no charge
to the public, t
Looks good to me.
Kelvin.
On 18/10/2007, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/17/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I wonder if we could shorten this just a little. How about:
> >
> > "...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation
> > and maintenance
On 10/18/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It looks pretty good to me.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "ant elder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:16 PM
> Subj
It looks pretty good to me.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "ant elder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Tuscany as a top level project
On 10/17/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
On 10/17/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wonder if we could shorten this just a little. How about:
>
> "...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation
> and maintenance of open-source software for distribution at no charge
> to the public, that simplifies the d
On Oct 15, 2007, at 12:06 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Noel
I've expressed some concern before about diversity and independence
[1]. At the time, 11 out of 12 members proposed for the TLP's PMC
worked for a single organization. Since then, a couple more people
have been added but the ratio i
On 10/13/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...+1 for graduation, with these two edits
Not sure if the vote is still going, but considering the current
discussions and uncertainty about community diversity, I change my
vote to a +0.
IMHO, our current "3 independent committe
Luciano Resende wrote:
"...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the
creation and maintenance of open-source software for distribution
at no charge to the public, that simplifies the development,
deployment and management of distributed applications built as
compositions of serv
"...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the
creation and maintenance of open-source software for distribution
at no charge to the public, that simplifies the development,
deployment and management of distributed applications built as
compositions of service components, where the c
Mike Edwards wrote:
Folks,
ant elder wrote:
Having both the last two sentences start "This software will..." doesn't
sound perfect to me so if we are able to move the "for distribution
at no
charge..." bit up to the top that seems better, which gives:
...establish a Project Management Comm
Folks,
ant elder wrote:
Having both the last two sentences start "This software will..." doesn't
sound perfect to me so if we are able to move the "for distribution at no
charge..." bit up to the top that seems better, which gives:
...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the
On 10/15/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Taking a quick sample of the mailing list, the only contributors to
> >> the discussion thread on Graduation, which I would assume would have
> >> been a hot topic, were from the vendor.
> >
> >
> > I remember contributing to discussion on
On 10/15/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) It has survived key members of the project jumping ship and forking the
> code*
> * Personally I think you should have disclosed your previous involvement in
> this project to the IPMC when you started this thread.
probably so: but
>
> I was thinking primarily of people who were on the TLP PMC proposal.
> But yes, you and Matthew did help draft that proposal.
I also took part in some other discussions.
As the
> diversity sub-thread was taken to the private list (which is kind of
> ironic in itself) there may also have been
I don't see that has any relevance to this discussion. If someone wants to
do a presentation about Apache HTTPD focussing on mod_proxy and mod_rewrite
it doesn't mean the other modules aren't important.
Paul
On 10/15/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 15, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Pa
On Oct 15, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
Is it stated somewhere that the Java SCA/SDO components are "core"
compared
to C++ and DAS?
And then in a coincidence of timing, there is this:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200710.mbox/%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
%3e
wh
On Oct 15, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
Jeremy
Neither of the two independents
are active in the core project areas of Java SCA or SDO (they are
committing to the C++ implementation or to DAS).
Is it stated somewhere that the Java SCA/SDO components are "core"
compared
to C++
Jeremy
Neither of the two independents
> are active in the core project areas of Java SCA or SDO (they are
> committing to the C++ implementation or to DAS).
Is it stated somewhere that the Java SCA/SDO components are "core" compared
to C++ and DAS?
Taking a quick sample of the mailing list, t
On Oct 13, 2007, at 10:07 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ant,
Are there any issues that should be pointed out, such as the
(hopefully)
mechanical licensing header issue in stdcxx, or community
diversity, which
at least in part is measuring independence from corporate backing
(a popular
thread
On 10/13/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/13/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/13/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So bringing together all the comments so far gives something like:
> >
> > ...establish a Project Manage
Agreed. This is why we have avoided putting JBI in the ServiceMix TLP charter.
In addition, ServiceMix may provide support for SCA in the future, has
JBI and SCA are not incompatible at all (this may be done leveraging
some parts of Tuscany, but not necesseraly, as the only interesting
bit of Tusc
Noel
Just an aside. Synapse implements a number of standards, and is not limited
to SOAP/WSDL. We have simple samples that take CSV files from FTP and
publish pure XML/JMS. I also think that ServiceMix would like to say they do
more than JBI.
Paul
On 10/13/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ant,
Are there any issues that should be pointed out, such as the (hopefully)
mechanical licensing header issue in stdcxx, or community diversity, which
at least in part is measuring independence from corporate backing (a popular
thread this past month)? It seems that the latter should be well in
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> "Tuscany will implement relevant open standards including ..."
As previously noted, the core standards for Tuscany are SCA and SDO, with
others as desired by the community. What distinguishes Tuscany from
ServiceMix from Synapse is:
Tuscany: SCA / SDO
ServiceM
On 10/13/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/13/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/13/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So bringing together all the comments so far gives something like:
> >
> > ...establish a Project Management
On 10/13/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/13/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So bringing together all the comments so far gives something like:
>
> ...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the
> creation and maintenance of open-source softwa
On 10/13/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/12/07, Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > 2. grrr SOA! i'm unclear what this really means in this case. tho
On 10/12/07, Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2. grrr SOA! i'm unclear what this really means in this case. though
> > i've been following the lists for quite a while now, i still find it
> >
On 10/12/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 on graduation, with the two edits proposed by Mike...
+1 for graduation, with these two edits.
-Bertrand
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional comma
+1 on graduation, with the two edits proposed by Mike (comma before "based"
and "on but not limited to"). SOA is often used as a buzzword but it's also
unfortunately the only acronym available for that style of architecture.
Good luck guys!
On 10/12/07, Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
Folks,
Comments inline...
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Establish the Apache Tuscany project:
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's
On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Establish the Apache Tuscany project:
>
>WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
> interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's
> purpose to establish a Project Management Committee
On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
some grammar queries
> Establish the Apache Tuscany project:
>
>WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
> interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's
> purpose to establish a Projec
+1 (IPMC and ex-Mentor :)
-- dims
On 10/12/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 from me (IPMC and Mentor)
>
> Paul
>
> On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Tuscany podling respectfully requests the Incubator to consider its
> > graduation to a Top Level Project.
+1 from me (IPMC and Mentor)
Paul
On 10/12/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Tuscany podling respectfully requests the Incubator to consider its
> graduation to a Top Level Project.
>
> While incubating Tuscany has made 14(!) releases, voted in 19 new
> committers, survived conflicts
The Tuscany podling respectfully requests the Incubator to consider its
graduation to a Top Level Project.
While incubating Tuscany has made 14(!) releases, voted in 19 new
committers, survived conflicts, formed its PPMC, learned how to govern
itself, resolved licensing issues and an active commun
81 matches
Mail list logo
