Tapestry?

[Andrew C. Oliver]

Status?

in part, waiting for me to commit my edits to the web site.
also waiting for (but not blocking on) sam ruby's response
from jakarta.
let's see. howard, are you here? probably the first things
to do would be mailing lists and a cvs module into which
the code can be transferred. anyone think of an earlier
step than that?

It would be preferrable if the Tapestry committers subscribed to this
list at this time. (general-subscribe-d1GL8uUpDdXTxqt0kkDzDmD2FQJk+8+***@public.gmane.org)

Those things are listed in the proposal.
(http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?TapestryProposal).
"

[3] identify the Jakarta resources to be created

[3.1] mailing lists(s)

tapestry-user tapestry-dev tapestry-cvs

[3.2] CVS repositories

jakarta-tapestry

[3.3] Bugzilla

framework - tapestry components - web site, contrib library,
documentation, examples

[3.4] Wiki

"

It might be good if there was a public incubator module that I and later
the Tapestry Committers could check such things into (as the proposal is
IMHO in a post-wiki stage).

Do you feel moving the mailing lists is in the best interests of the
Tapestry community and the
community proper? Or should that perhaps wait until a presupposed move
to Jakarta.

Possible Disadvantages (assuming migration to jakarta):
requiring people to unsubscribe (or not) from sourceforge mail lists,
subscribe to apache-incubator mail lists, then subscribe to the jakarta
ones later is kinda rough.

The website also has some of the same issues (and add google to that,
broken links for anyone referring to Tapestry and sourceforge doesn't
like to delete things)...
Though we could possibly handle that through configuration (I think)
later on by autoredirecting from incubator.apache.org/tapestry/*
jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/* via httpd config.

The CVS module does not have the same issue (there is only one repository).

What are your thoughts on these matters?

thanks,

-Andy




-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

[Howard M. Lewis Ship]

I've subscribed to the incubator list. I was just going to ask you about
progress.

My concern is CVS.

Do we start clean, or do we transfer our CVS repository from SourceForge to
Jakarta?

SourceForge prepares a nightly .tar of the repository.

Currently, we are progressing on three fronts. The CVS HEAD branch has 2.3,
which really should shift over to a beta release soon.

I've got a huge number of changes in the hship-2-3 branch, and Mind Bridge
has his set of changes in his branch. There have been commits to the HEAD
since I made my branch; it won't be difficult to synchronize my changes back
into the SF CVS repository, but if we shift repositories it'll be a
nightmare.

Ideally, we would freeze development on Tapestry long enough to get a clean
repository download from SF, then install it on Jakarta and maintain history
and integrity.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoliver-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+***@public.gmane.org>
To: <general-d1GL8uUpDdXTxqt0kkDzDmD2FQJk+8+***@public.gmane.org>; "Tapestry Contrib"
<tapestry-contrib-5NWGOfrQmneRv+***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 4:42 PM
Subject: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?

Post by Andrew C. Oliver

Status?

in part, waiting for me to commit my edits to the web site.
also waiting for (but not blocking on) sam ruby's response
from jakarta.
let's see. howard, are you here? probably the first things
to do would be mailing lists and a cvs module into which
the code can be transferred. anyone think of an earlier
step than that?

It would be preferrable if the Tapestry committers subscribed to this
Those things are listed in the proposal.
(http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?TapestryProposal).
"
[3] identify the Jakarta resources to be created
[3.1] mailing lists(s)
tapestry-user tapestry-dev tapestry-cvs
[3.2] CVS repositories
jakarta-tapestry
[3.3] Bugzilla
framework - tapestry components - web site, contrib library,
documentation, examples
[3.4] Wiki
"
It might be good if there was a public incubator module that I and later
the Tapestry Committers could check such things into (as the proposal is
IMHO in a post-wiki stage).
Do you feel moving the mailing lists is in the best interests of the
Tapestry community and the
community proper? Or should that perhaps wait until a presupposed move
to Jakarta.
requiring people to unsubscribe (or not) from sourceforge mail lists,
subscribe to apache-incubator mail lists, then subscribe to the jakarta
ones later is kinda rough.
The website also has some of the same issues (and add google to that,
broken links for anyone referring to Tapestry and sourceforge doesn't
like to delete things)...
Though we could possibly handle that through configuration (I think)
later on by autoredirecting from incubator.apache.org/tapestry/*
jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/* via httpd config.
The CVS module does not have the same issue (there is only one

repository).

Post by Andrew C. Oliver
What are your thoughts on these matters?
thanks,
-Andy
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Tapestry-contrib mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-contrib

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

[Howard M. Lewis Ship]

Eventually, I'd like to change package names. Yes, that would wipe out
history as well. I've already subjected users to this once: renaming
com.primix.tapestry.* to net.sf.tapestry*.

Renaming to org.apache.tapestry.* would be desirable. I suppose doing it
sooner rather than later is good, because there's a project afoot to create
a tapestry component repository, and that will be a nightmare if there are
two competing, incompatible code bases.

Our main problem is that the source code repository is anything but
quiescent right now; we're trying to close down the 2.3 release (in the
HEAD) while forging onward with lots of 2.4 work. 2.3 will be the last
release on SF (in fact, 2.3 GA may be on Incubator/Jakarta).

I'm very concerned about losing work at this point. If we move repositories
or rename packages, we may lose the ability to apply a CVS patch.

If it was just my branch, the problem would be more tractable; I would
simply merge in a few changes from the 2.3 code into my branch ... we could
even do renames and reoganization and check in my branch to Jakarta as
org.apache.tapestry.*/1.1.

Alas, Mind Bridge has his own set of changes in his branch.

I've never tried this, but ... we could create a new branch off of head,
let's call it "incubator". I could attempt to move my changes to the
incubator branch, then Mind Bridge could do the same. We could then rename
packages to org.apache and use that as the image to commit to a Jakarta
repository.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Ruby" <rubys-***@public.gmane.org>
To: <general-d1GL8uUpDdXTxqt0kkDzDmD2FQJk+8+***@public.gmane.org>; <***@attbi.com>
Cc: "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoliver-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+***@public.gmane.org>; "Tapestry Contrib"
<tapestry-contrib-5NWGOfrQmneRv+***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?

Post by Howard M. Lewis Ship
Do we start clean, or do we transfer our CVS repository from SourceForge to
Jakarta?

Are you planning on changing your class names to org.apache.*?
- Sam Ruby

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

[Howard M. Lewis Ship]

Top level vs. Jakarta.

Jakarta is "server side Java". Apache is less well defined.

I also think the synnergy will be easier to manager within Jakarta. For
example, there is a bit of code in Tapestry that is not Tapestry specific
that could move into the commons, into commons-lang perhaps.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoliver-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+***@public.gmane.org>
To: <general-d1GL8uUpDdXTxqt0kkDzDmD2FQJk+8+***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: Role of incubator was Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?

Both Avalon and Ant are now sister ASF projects of Jakarta - of equal
stature in the eyes of the ASF. The Jakarta PMC is no longer
accountable for their actions.

Thanks for clearing that up. I think I get it now.

I thought this "reorganization" was going to be voluntary. This

message

does not sound that way.

I personally would welcome Tapestry as *either* a top level project or a
Jakarta subproject.

Yeah either is fine. I think Tapestry mainly prefers to be on Jakarta
rather than top level because "thats where all the Java projects are".
The rest is irellevant to me. I'm game for either. (this is not to
say its not important, just not to me)
-Andy

- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf