Rahul Akolkar wrote:
6/6/06, Felipe Leme <jakartalists1 (AT) felipeal (DOT) netwrote:
<snip/>
>>
>So, answering your question, yes, the project is supposed to support
>libraries from another languages. In fact, the existence of such
>libraries is an argument for the TLP creation; besides the existing
>Cactus and JMeter, we have at least 3 sub-projects contenders (the 2 you
>mentioned and one for testing HTML pages), 4 if we count DbUnit
>(although this one will take more time due to the licenses
>incompatibility).
>>
<snap/>
Yup, there clearly is developer/community interest towards the
formation of this project. Plus, there is a chance to rejuvenate some
existing projects by sheer proximity to newer projects with active
developers (amongst other things).
Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
comments yet?
I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
disallows Testing.
Phil
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

6/9/06, Phil Steitz <phil (AT) steitz (DOT) comwrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
<snip/>

Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
comments yet?

I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
disallows Testing.

<snap/>

While it may make sense to say something along those lines in a larger
context, I do not believe this can be part of any central argument
towards the cause.

If we're going to stand, we are going to do it on the basis of the
merit of our proposal and the community support for it, rather than
some sort of comparative analysis.

The easy way out of your concern above may be to simply say that the
board has now changed its mind about the existence of potential
umbrella projects based on the "lessons" learnt in the meantime (Hen
actually alludes to that in his email) -- for me atleast, that would
probably be an acceptable answer to the question posed.
-Rahul

Phil

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

6/9/06, Jesse Kuhnert <jkuhnert (AT) gmail (DOT) comwrote:
It makes sense that people want to be careful about a tl subdomain. Some of
the projects you mentioned are fairly staple diets to a good majority of
development projects. (ie struts/logging/xml/commons/etc) .

What would go into testing.apache.org?
<snip/>

Elements of the seed set (see Felipe's prior email) and over time,
other codebases with active developer support. , this is the
all important question, so all input is welcome, both on what should
go in and what shouldn't.

I'm all for it as testing in general
has to be good thing and there is potential for all sorts of shared support
if it is made easy to contribute into and collaborate onEsp in the web
based items world.

At the same time, if it's not substantial looking enough it could
~potentially~ be viewed as a negative thing.

<snap/>

Not sure what you mean, but IIUC, probably not as high a concern,
since if jmeter.apache.org is substantial looking (see Hen's initial
email in this thread), then surely { jmeter , cactus , foo } is
substantial looking to me.
-Rahul

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Rahul Akolkar wrote:

6/9/06, Phil Steitz <phil (AT) steitz (DOT) comwrote:
>Rahul Akolkar wrote:
<snip/>
>>
>Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
>are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
>regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
>still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
>maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
>comments yet?
>
>I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
>mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
>appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
>Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
>disallows Testing.
>
<snap/>

While it may make sense to say something along those lines in a larger
context, I do not believe this can be part of any central argument
towards the cause.

Yep, this was the basis of my previously weak case. :)

Hen

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Rahul Akolkar wrote:
6/9/06, Phil Steitz <phil (AT) steitz (DOT) comwrote:
>Rahul Akolkar wrote:
<snip/>
>>
>Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
>are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
>regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
>still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
>maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
>comments yet?
>>
>I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
>mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
>appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
>Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
>disallows Testing.
>>
<snap/>

While it may make sense to say something along those lines in a larger
context, I do not believe this can be part of any central argument
towards the cause.

If we're going to stand, we are going to do it on the basis of the
merit of our proposal and the community support for it, rather than
some sort of comparative analysis.
That's not what I meant. If the objection is "this looks like an
umbrella, and umbrellas are evil" it is fair and reasonable for us to
ask what exactly is meant by an umbrella so that we can address the
specific concerns directly.

Phil

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

6/10/06, Phil Steitz <phil (AT) steitz (DOT) comwrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
<snip/>

While it may make sense to say something along those lines in a larger
context, I do not believe this can be part of any central argument
towards the cause.

If we're going to stand, we are going to do it on the basis of the
merit of our proposal and the community support for it, rather than
some sort of comparative analysis.
That's not what I meant. If the objection is "this looks like an
umbrella, and umbrellas are evil" it is fair and reasonable for us to
ask what exactly is meant by an umbrella so that we can address the
specific concerns directly.

<snip/>

Agreed.

Phil, are you going to fill in for Hen at the next board meeting? I
have no clue who attends board meetings (members? officers of the
foundation? -- we have a few members listed on the proposal). We need
someone to talk to this proposal when it is picked up at the next
meeting. Are you willing and able?
-Rahul

Phil
--

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Rahul Akolkar wrote:
6/10/06, Phil Steitz <phil (AT) steitz (DOT) comwrote:
>Rahul Akolkar wrote:
><snip/>
>>
>While it may make sense to say something along those lines in a larger
>context, I do not believe this can be part of any central argument
>towards the cause.
>>
>If we're going to stand, we are going to do it on the basis of the
>merit of our proposal and the community support for it, rather than
>some sort of comparative analysis.
>That's not what I meant. If the objection is "this looks like an
>umbrella, and umbrellas are evil" it is fair and reasonable for us to
>ask what exactly is meant by an umbrella so that we can address the
>specific concerns directly.
>>
<snip/>

Agreed.

Phil, are you going to fill in for Hen at the next board meeting? I
have no clue who attends board meetings (members? officers of the
foundation? -- we have a few members listed on the proposal). We need
someone to talk to this proposal when it is picked up at the next
meeting. Are you willing and able?
I was not planning to attend the board mtg - I just volunteered to fill
in by preparing the Jakarta report and submitting it on Hen's behalf. I
don't think delegates / proxies are allowed at board mtgs. I am happy
to do whatever I can to help make sure the proposal gets fairly
reviewed, though.

It would seem a reasonable request to have one of the people on the
proposal attend the meeting to represent Testing. Does anyone know how
this kind of thing has been handled in the past at board meetings?

Phil

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Phil Steitz wrote:

I was not planning to attend the board mtg - I just volunteered to fill
in by preparing the Jakarta report and submitting it on Hen's behalf. I
don't think delegates / proxies are allowed at board mtgs. I am happy
to do whatever I can to help make sure the proposal gets fairly
reviewed, though.

Any member can call in to the board meeting as a guest - for the last few
I've been calling in as a guest just out of interest to see what goes on,
and as I'm there I get asked about the Jakarta bits that come up.

It would seem a reasonable request to have one of the people on the
proposal attend the meeting to represent Testing. Does anyone know how
this kind of thing has been handled in the past at board meetings?

Imprompty IRC conversations I suspect, and someone on the board being
tasked with sending a reply to the people taking up the resolution. I
didn't do a very good job of making notes of that when I was listening in,
so my passing of information back is a bit anaemic.

Hen

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Henri Yandell wrote:
--
Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>I was not planning to attend the board mtg - I just volunteered to fill
>in by preparing the Jakarta report and submitting it on Hen's behalf. I
>don't think delegates / proxies are allowed at board mtgs. I am happy
>to do whatever I can to help make sure the proposal gets fairly
>reviewed, though.
>
Any member can call in to the board meeting as a guest - for the last
few I've been calling in as a guest just out of interest to see what
goes on, and as I'm there I get asked about the Jakarta bits that come
up.

Thanks for clarifying this, Hen. I thought PMC chairs always attended
the meeting and that they were otherwise closed. Sorry for the
confusion. I will plan to join as a guest. If any of the other
sponsoring members are available, please feel free to step up for this.
>It would seem a reasonable request to have one of the people on the
>proposal attend the meeting to represent Testing. Does anyone know how
>this kind of thing has been handled in the past at board meetings?
>
Imprompty IRC conversations I suspect, and someone on the board being
tasked with sending a reply to the people taking up the resolution. I
didn't do a very good job of making notes of that when I was listening
in, so my passing of information back is a bit anaemic.
K, I will plan to join the meeting and do my best to get a clear
picture of what the board is looking for.

Phil

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Thu, 2006-06-08 at 22:50 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
6/6/06, Felipe Leme <jakartalists1 (AT) felipeal (DOT) netwrote:
<snip/>
>>
>So, answering your question, yes, the project is supposed to support
>libraries from another languages. In fact, the existence of such
>libraries is an argument for the TLP creation; besides the existing
>Cactus and JMeter, we have at least 3 sub-projects contenders (the 2 you
>mentioned and one for testing HTML pages), 4 if we count DbUnit
>(although this one will take more time due to the licenses
>incompatibility).
>>
<snap/>

Yup, there clearly is developer/community interest towards the
formation of this project. Plus, there is a chance to rejuvenate some
existing projects by sheer proximity to newer projects with active
developers (amongst other things).

Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
comments yet?
I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
disallows Testing.

(this is the way i see the world and so is likely biased)

the ASF runs on sub-minimal rules. most votes are subjective and not
objective. the criteria applied are personal and evolve over time. past
decisions are not revised to take account of changing opinions.

there is no rule against umbrella projects and so no single consensus
definition is needed. their is quite a diversity of opinions on umbrella
nature amongst the members. (i won't give my opinions on umbrella nature
now - they represent a minority viewpoint amongst the membership and may
be misleading.)

the board is elected by the members and so reflects the opinions of the
membership. there is a strong consensus that umbrella-ness is a warning
sign. just as there isn't a single objective definition, there is no one
definitive reason why members believe this. (again, i won't give my
opinions now - they represent a minority viewpoint amongst the
membership and so may be misleading.)

recently (for various reasons) there has been a definite hardening of
attitudes.
- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

6/11/06, Phil Steitz <phil (AT) steitz (DOT) comwrote:
<snip/>
K, I will plan to join the meeting and do my best to get a clear
picture of what the board is looking for.

<snap/>

Great, thanks Phil.
-Rahul

Phil
--

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

6/11/06, robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldonkin (AT) blueyonder (DOT) co.ukwrote:
Thu, 2006-06-08 at 22:50 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
<snip/>

Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
comments yet?
I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
disallows Testing.

(this is the way i see the world and so is likely biased)

the ASF runs on sub-minimal rules. most votes are subjective and not
objective. the criteria applied are personal and evolve over time. past
decisions are not revised to take account of changing opinions.

<snap/>

Thanks for that input Robert, seems in line with what I had
anticipated -- nice and fuzzy on an objective level.

The thing that is clear, however, is that this is membership driven
(as it should be too, IM) so I'll pretty much step aside at this
point and return to my seat as a casual (yet keenly interested)
observer.
-Rahul

there is no rule against umbrella projects and so no single consensus
definition is needed. their is quite a diversity of opinions on umbrella
nature amongst the members. (i won't give my opinions on umbrella nature
now - they represent a minority viewpoint amongst the membership and may
be misleading.)

the board is elected by the members and so reflects the opinions of the
membership. there is a strong consensus that umbrella-ness is a warning
sign. just as there isn't a single objective definition, there is no one
definitive reason why members believe this. (again, i won't give my
opinions now - they represent a minority viewpoint amongst the
membership and so may be misleading.)

recently (for various reasons) there has been a definite hardening of
attitudes.

- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org

Mon, 2006-06-12 at 14:24 -0400, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
6/11/06, robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldonkin (AT) blueyonder (DOT) co.ukwrote:
Thu, 2006-06-08 at 22:50 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Rahul Akolkar wrote:
<snip/>

Per the umbrella concern, the question then becomes what -- if any --
are the mitigating factors that can address such a concern with
regards to this proposal. Based on Hen's email, seems like the ball is
still in the board's court -- as we wait for the next meeting -- so
maybe its premature to discuss if we should be trying to address those
comments yet?
I would also like to understand exactly what the problem is and what
mitigating steps may be possible. In particular, I would very much
appreciate a definition of "umbrella" that allows Geronimo, Logging,
Jakarta Commons, DB, XML, Web Services and Struts, but somehow
disallows Testing.

(this is the way i see the world and so is likely biased)

the ASF runs on sub-minimal rules. most votes are subjective and not
objective. the criteria applied are personal and evolve over time. past
decisions are not revised to take account of changing opinions.

<snap/>

Thanks for that input Robert, seems in line with what I had
anticipated -- nice and fuzzy on an objective level.

you know me too well :)

often fuzziness indicates that the issues haven't really been completely
settled as yet

The thing that is clear, however, is that this is membership driven
(as it should be too, IM) so I'll pretty much step aside at this
point and return to my seat as a casual (yet keenly interested)
observer.

we don't have the answers. we may not even know the questions. but we do
have confidence in our ability to learn and evolve. that's one reason
why the ASF chooses to grow policy and why policy changes over time.

it's important that every consensus is challenged. once any consensus
opinion of the membership is accepted as true just because it is
received from that group, ossification and group speak sets in.
evolution and growth stops. these are the real threats to apache.

we need to people to ask 'why?' (so please don't stop)

coming back to henri's comments: the ASF prefers self-organisation.
reorganisations are much more likely to be approved if it's the
committers involved who are pushing for them. if the communities are
effected are strongly in favour then this has great weight.
- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help (AT) jakarta (DOT) apache.org