commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <>
Subject Re: [feedparser] News / Status
Date Fri, 03 Mar 2006 02:46:15 GMT
On 3/2/06, Simon Kitching <> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 17:50 -0500, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> >
> > Is that really the only reason? With [proxy] (and [scxml] as well),
> > one of the glaring reasons I see is that they're still in sandbox. We
> > *couldn't* release them right now, irrespective of how daunting the
> > task of cutting a release may be. I'd say, its different.
> What you can't do is have binaries built from sandbox code then
> distributed from the official Apache mirrors. And that seems right to
> me; distribution from the official site(s) implies that the project has
> passed Apache's tests for quality -- including having a community of
> developers trusted by Apache to verify and maintain it.

Yes, I'm aware, and completely agree.

> The fact that the code is still in the sandbox implies that the project
> has NOT passed those tests. It doesn't mean the code isn't good; it may
> be brilliant. However if there isn't a community of existing apache
> committers looking at the code, Apache doesn't *know* it's brilliant.

... sure, à la "see the light".

> I believe that binaries can still be built from sandbox code and
> distributed from your address, and that the sandbox
> site can point to that location as a source of "unofficial" binaries.

Even better, we have nightlies, thanks to Craig.

> If SCXML is factored out of an existing project, then can't you get
> half-a-dozen committers from that project to put themselves forward as
> commons committers then call for the promotion of SCXML followed by a
> release? Approval of existing committers from another Apache project
> won't take long, as long as they really are serious about verifying and
> maintaing SCXML.

Half-a-dozen, such luxuries is Commons talk ;-) You probably need to
have been recently active in Taglibs to know what I'm talking about.
In any case, based on the growing interest in [scxml] on the
CommonsPeople wiki page [1], which currently shows atleast 5
committers interested in [scxml] (in theory or more), I'm happy to
give this more time. I probably naively believe that more of us will
see its merit, and I plan on staying that way for a while ;-)



> Cheers,
> Simon

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message