Re: Moving towards a proposed vote
Roland Weber <[email protected]> Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:34:11 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.apache.incubator.projects |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Noel, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > I see: > > Angela > Roland > Luciano > > who appear to want to be Committers. Nope, I don't strive to be a committer. I intend to stay involved in a strictly non-coding role: architectural discussions, Apache processes, maybe some documentation over time. I'm currently on vacation and can allocate some more time to get started, but I'll have to cut back again in a few weeks. I was considering to champion this proposal, but I'm glad you've stepped up for that role :-) However, I'd still like to get a clearer picture of where we stand and how we intend to go forward. > Where do we stand on the proposal? Is it considered ready, or do people > want to do some further revisions? The proposal mentions three codebases, and I remember those popping up during the discussion on general@. It should explicitly list which these three codebases are, and on what technologies they are based. This is to highlight the different options that have been considered in the past, and what we can draw from. I suggest to divide the information in the proposal more cleanly into the proposal itself (what will the project provide), the current status (which codebases to draw from), and the high-level design part (open questions). I'm not sure whether the latter should go into the proposal at all. If it does, I'd like it to be a bit clearer than currently. For example, Sling has been mentioned. Unless I am confusing things, Sling is a framework based on JCR. So a Sling front-end would access the repository directly and not through via the proposed web service? Formally, the proposal contains many "I" referring to Angie. Is it still Angie's proposal to bring the Caitrin codebase to Apache and use it as the starting point for development? Or is it the proposal of the small community that is beginning to form here and that starts from scratch with a high-level design? If the latter, the wording should be changed to reflect that. I'd also like to see more than just Angie's name in the "Initial Committers" section. Frankly, I don't think that a single committer can reasonably pull this off when starting from scratch. The advantage of starting from a codebase is that you can tell people to download and play with it. I'll try to answer some of the questions I raised above, and would like to update the proposal in the coming days. cheers, Roland