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 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 01:28:57 GMT
On Tuesday 20 April 2010 8:49:02 pm Eran Chinthaka Withana wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm still confused about this re-org. People started this re-org, saying
> that the projects inside old-WS project was not manageable and no knows
> whats going inside all the projects. It was also mentioned that, since
> project X people also get to have a say in project Y (where X,Y are in WS),
> it will be a mess.
> Now why is this theory not applying to Axiom or XmlSchema projects. They
> are totally independent projects, that can be used beyond Axis2. Also some
> one concentrating only on XmlSchema or Axiom might not be interested in
> Axis2 project or its Karma. So why do you wanna put them inside Axis2 or
> new WS project, once again making the same mistake we had earlier?
> 
> Axis2 depends on Axiom and XmlSchema, but not the other way round.

Well, Axiom I think has enough going on with it and enough activity that could 
warrant it being a TLP.   I really could go either way on that.

If you follow board@ at all (I know, most of you cannot follow it) and the 
board meeting summaries and such, one of the other things that they are not 
liking lately are the repeat "Nothing happened this quarter" reports occuring 
over and over and over from the projects.   For some of the smaller, less 
active, projects (like XmlSchema), there would definitely be a danger of 
falling into that path and the board would be concerned about the 
oversight/community of such small projects.   

So there needs to be some level of balance between being able to properly 
provide oversight to everything going on in the project along with being able 
to show there is an active and healthy community.   The question is how to 
achieve that?  If a project like Axiom feels it can go it alone, I would 
definitely support it (providing the new PMC is large enough), but I'd also 
support keeping the smaller ones together until they are "ready" or until the 
technology becomes irrelevant and it goes to the Attic.

Dan

> Dan, if new WS project should not be an umbrella project, then why do you
> think we should put Axiom/XmlSchema inside it?
> 
> Thanks,
> Eran Chinthaka
> 
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 20 April 2010 7:54:27 pm Glen Daniels wrote:
> > > Hi Sanjiva,
> > > 
> > > Sorry for the late reply.
> > > 
> > > On 4/17/2010 3:37 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> > > > Glen, your proposal amounts to having gone thru a lot of pain to have
> > > > simply TLPed Axis. The entire board prerogative was to break up WS
> > > > wasn't it?
> > > 
> > > My interpretation was that it was more "WS is too big" than "WS should
> > > entirely go away".  There are plenty of other projects at Apache that
> > 
> > have
> > 
> > > a reasonable number of subprojects, with related functions and
> > 
> > development
> > 
> > > communities.  I'm not yet convinced that there is sufficient community
> > > around some of the individual subprojects to bootstrap a happy PMC, and
> > > there also may be good reason to keep some of these things together.
> > > 
> > > I think reducing WS from >17 subprojects in a two-level container down
> > > to
> > 
> > a
> > 
> > > single-level container for 6 common Web Service related components
> > > would
> > 
> > be
> > 
> > > a pretty good accomplishment... and nothing prevents that from being an
> > > intermediate step towards spinning off further TLPs down the road.
> > > 
> > > I'm not saying I'm -1 to more TLPs, by the way, just exploring my
> > > off-the-cuff impressions.
> > 
> > Just want to say I completely agree with everything Glen said.  Well put.
> > It's also my understanding that getting WS down to a smaller, more
> > concentrated project targeting shared WS technologies would be acceptable
> > and
> > really would no longer be an "umbrella" project.
> > 
> > Dan
> > 
> > > --Glen
> > > 
> > > > I'd prefer to make a bunch of new TLPs - give people a chance to grow
> > > > into new roles as well. All the ones you listed as "keep" should be
> > 
> > TLPs
> > 
> > > > IMO. There is no "minimum size" required to be a TLP.
> > > > 
> > > > Sanjiva.
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Glen Daniels <glen@thoughtcraft.com
> > > > 
> > > > <mailto:glen@thoughtcraft.com>> 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.
> > > >     
> > > >     I think that it's pretty clear jUDDI and Scout should migrate
> > > >     together to a
> > > >     new TLP, Apache jUDDI, with Kurt as chair.  Thoughts?
> > > >     
> > > >     Does anyone outside of Axis2/C use Guththila?  If not, I'd
> > > >     suggest that migrate to Axis.
> > > >     
> > > >     Is there enough activity on XMLRPC to keep it alive?  Jochen?
> > > >     
> > > >     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.  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?  As
> > 
> > for
> > 
> > > >     WSS4J,
> > > >     I'm not sure if it should stay or become a TLP.
> > > >     
> > > >     So... what do you guys think?
> > > >     
> > > >     Thanks,
> > > >     --Glen
> > > >     
> > > >     P.S.  Reminder - please fill out your sections of our board
> > > >     report for this
> > > >     month if appropriate!
> > 
> > --
> > Daniel Kulp
> > dkulp@apache.org
> > http://dankulp.com/blog

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

Mime
View raw message