ws-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: What's next for WS@Apache? Discuss.
Date Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:36:26 GMT

I don't have a binding vote, but my thoughts.....

(one more thing you MIGHT want to consider is contacting the 100+ 
committer/PMC members and finding which could be made emeritus to cut down the 
list a little bit)

On Wednesday 14 April 2010 11:08:17 pm Glen Daniels wrote:
> Hey y'all,
> 
> So as per my earlier mail to the dev lists, we need to talk about...
> 
> * Which subprojects should be promoted to TLPs?
> * Which subprojects should be migrated to the Attic?
> * What should the structure look like for what remains?
> 
> Here's what we've got to work with.
> 
> 1. Axiom (commons)
> 2. Neethi (commons)
> 3. XmlSchema (commons)
> 4. Tcpmon (commons)
> 5. Guththila (commons)
> 6. JaxMe
> 7. jUDDI
> 8. Scout
> 9. Muse
> 10.Woden
> 11.WSIF
> 12.WSS4J
> 13.XMLRPC
> 
> Let's talk Attic first.  It seems WSIF and Muse have been pretty much
> inactive for some time now, so I'd propose we get the ball rolling with
> proposals to Attic both of those.  JaxMe also seems ripe for the Attic.

That makes sense to me.  


> I think that it's pretty clear jUDDI and Scout should migrate together to a
> new TLP, Apache jUDDI, with Kurt as chair.  Thoughts?

+1


> Does anyone outside of Axis2/C use Guththila?  If not, I'd suggest that
> migrate to Axis.

+1


> Is there enough activity on XMLRPC to keep it alive?  Jochen?

As long as there are people using it that may require some fixes or support 
and someone is willing to support them if required, keeping it in WS for now 
is probably OK.    There was another project (Excalibur) that recently 
discussed this and came to the same conclusion.

> Personally, I'd probably prefer to leave Axiom, Neethi, XmlSchema, and
> Tcpmon as subprojects of WS.  I'd like to get rid of the "commons" layer,
> though, since I think the "new" WS project should itself be a set of
> commonly useful WS components.  

+1

> I know other ideas have been discussed for
> the commons stuff, so let's start that discussion and get the various
> opinions out on the table?
> 
> That leaves Woden and WSS4J.  Maybe Woden should stay in WS?

+1

> As for WSS4J, I'm not sure if it should stay or become a TLP.
> So... what do you guys think?

Hmmm...  I don't think there really is enough there for TLP.   Another "idea" 
MAY be to merge it into Santuario with the thought that a closer collaboration 
with the lower level libraries may yield some interesting results.   That 
said, I don't think the Santuario community is exactly the most healthy at 
this point either so definitely a concern about that as well.     I guess 
keeping it in WS makes sense.


-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog

Mime
View raw message