RAT -> Apache Incubator
robertburrelldonkin
to the Apache Incubator. There are various reasons (that I don't
really want to go into) why this didn't happen straight away but i
think that now would be a good time.
any objections?
is everyone happy to grant the code to Apache?
- robert
Jochen Wiedmann
> is everyone happy to grant the code to Apache?
Of course, this will only simplify the procedures. For example, we can
add automatic deployment to the Apache Maven repositories to the build
files.
I only wonder, whether there won't be a short track available, that
avoids the Incubator: The committers are all Apache committers, the
license is ASL anyways, the code is rewritten from scratch - I see no
reasons for the Incubator, apart from the policy that code comes in
through the Incubator. (And, possibly, that one might argue, that we
are no diversive community, but arise all out of the same organisation
... :-)
Jochen
--
"Besides, manipulating elections is under penalty of law, resulting in
a preventative effect against manipulating elections.
The german government justifying the use of electronic voting machines
and obviously believing that we don't need a police, because all
illegal actions are forbidden.
Matthieu
So I'm +1 on bringing it within the ASF. As for the incubator I think
there are pros and cons, on one side it certainly adds a but of
overhead (but I think there's enough knowledge here to keep that
minimal) and on the other side it has the benefit to be a bigger
community than most other ASF ones. By that I mean that a lot of
people hang around gen...@i.a.o. And more awareness is good.
But I'm just a newcomer so you're much better qualified than I to make
the right decision.
On Aug 4, 11:33 am, "Jochen Wiedmann" <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Jochen Wiedmann
> But I'm just a newcomer so you're much better qualified than I to make
> the right decision.
It's not so much of a decision we've got to make than the question
whether it's possible at all.
robertburrelldonkin
wrote:
> On 8/4/07, robertburrelldonkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > is everyone happy to grant the code to Apache?
>
> Of course, this will only simplify the procedures. For example, we can
> add automatic deployment to the Apache Maven repositories to the build
> files.
>
> I only wonder, whether there won't be a short track available, that
> avoids the Incubator: The committers are all Apache committers, the
> license is ASL anyways, the code is rewritten from scratch - I see no
> reasons for the Incubator, apart from the policy that code comes in
> through the Incubator. (And, possibly, that one might argue, that we
> are no diversive community, but arise all out of the same organisation
> ... :-)
i have no real desire ATM to move RAT anywhere else than the incubator
and a strong desire to avoid the issue of settling on a final
destination for RAT ATM
BTW jochen would you be happy to bring the plugin in?
- robert
Jochen Wiedmann
On 8/6/07, robertburrelldonkin <robertbur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i have no real desire ATM to move RAT anywhere else than the incubator
> and a strong desire to avoid the issue of settling on a final
> destination for RAT ATM
Sounds strange too me. I am not so keen with the Incubator and its
permanent discussions. :-)
> BTW jochen would you be happy to bring the plugin in?
I have no problems with moving the plugin to Apache as well. On the
other hand, I think its a good thing to have the plugin somewhat
separated from the core. I have had bad experiences with the Axis
plugins, which are too closely coupled with a particular version. If
RAT's API is settled, then I'd like to have the RAT version
configurable. But that can of course be done at Apache too, in a
separate SVN module.
Robert Burrell Donkin
>
> Hi, Robert,
>
> On 8/6/07, robertburrelldonkin <robertbur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > i have no real desire ATM to move RAT anywhere else than the incubator
> > and a strong desire to avoid the issue of settling on a final
> > destination for RAT ATM
>
> Sounds strange too me. I am not so keen with the Incubator and its
> permanent discussions. :-)
we've been working hard on the documentation for several years now and
things are better now
> > BTW jochen would you be happy to bring the plugin in?
>
> I have no problems with moving the plugin to Apache as well. On the
> other hand, I think its a good thing to have the plugin somewhat
> separated from the core. I have had bad experiences with the Axis
> plugins, which are too closely coupled with a particular version. If
> RAT's API is settled, then I'd like to have the RAT version
> configurable. But that can of course be done at Apache too, in a
> separate SVN module.
that's pretty much the way i'd see it working
it's increasingly clear to me that there are a number of useful,
reusable libraries which would benefit from being broken out of the
single code base
i would strong prefer to keep single karma across the whole project, though
- robert
Robert Burrell Donkin
>
> Hey, just chiming in as I'm starting getting interested in RAT.
great to hear from you
> So I'm +1 on bringing it within the ASF. As for the incubator I think
> there are pros and cons, on one side it certainly adds a but of
> overhead (but I think there's enough knowledge here to keep that
> minimal) and on the other side it has the benefit to be a bigger
> community than most other ASF ones. By that I mean that a lot of
> people hang around gen...@i.a.o. And more awareness is good.
+1
- robert
Stefan Bodewig
On 4 Aug, 13:50, robertburrelldonkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> is everyone happy to grant the code to Apache?
+1
Stefan
Nodet Guillaume
Robert Burrell Donkin
rest. i'm stepping my activity back up again now so hopefully i'll be
able to push this forward again soon.
- robert