2011/12/21 - Jakarta has been retired.

For more information, please explore the Attic.



Below is the IRC log from the meeting on 3-19-01 held over IRC.

11:15:34 AM: <Sam> Well, lets get started anyway... Jon, you had indicated that this IRC chat is being logged, right? 11:16:03 AM: <jon> it is now. 11:16:10 AM: <Sam> cool 11:16:27 AM: <jon> as long as i'm here, it is logged by my client. 11:16:41 AM: <Sam> First order of business is to welcome the new members then. I'll go update whoweare after this meeting. 11:16:41 AM: <Sam> Jason, any input on what your entry should look like? 11:17:30 AM: <jason> how about i'll write something up and send it to you after the meeting. 11:20:47 AM: <Sam> ok. Or commit it directly to jakarta-site2 if you wish. 11:20:47 AM: <jason> ok, no problem. 11:20:47 AM: <Sam> Next order of business is the scope of Jakarta. I was simply intending on cutting and pasting from the web page. 11:20:47 AM: <Sam> I had posted this previously, any issues? 11:20:47 AM: <Sam> The only issue the board had was whether or not we had sufficient members to cover that scope. 11:20:47 AM: <Sam> Do we feel that we have adequate coverage now? 11:20:47 AM: <geir> what isn't obviously covered? 11:20:47 AM: <craigmcc> Would it make sense to look at the current project mix vs PMC members involvement to answer that? 11:20:47 AM: <Sam> OK onto the next agenda item then...subproject hierarchy 11:20:55 AM: <Sam> I would like to see if we can map the PMC members onto subprojects. And not have the same two or three represent all. 11:21:23 AM: <Sam> I'll take Alexandria. 11:21:27 AM: <Sam> Ant? Diane? 11:25:23 AM: <craigmcc> I will cover Slide (as well as Tomcat and Struts) 11:25:23 AM: <geir> All I do is Velocity right now, so I volunteer for that if Jason and Jon don't mind 11:25:23 AM: <dlh> Yep, that's the only one (so far) I really deal with or know anything much about. 11:25:23 AM: <jason> velocity and turbine for me 11:25:23 AM: <Ted> Taglibs (Struts and Slide) 11:25:23 AM: <cgu> For me it is clear: log4j. 11:25:23 AM: <geir> I assume peter for Avalon? 11:25:23 AM: <dfs> I'm covering ORO of course, but if there's need for extra coverage on tools projects like Ant, I'm very interested in dedicating the time. 11:25:23 AM: <Sam> Peter is avalon* and james 11:25:23 AM: <Hans> I've only been involved with Tomcat, and a little bit with Taglibs, but as I'm about to resign (as Sam knows), I can't take on any subproject 11:25:23 AM: <Ted> Daniel, do you want to take Regexp too, or I could. 11:25:23 AM: <dfs> I was just about to suggest that: :) I can take regexp too. There needs to be more communication between oro and regexp anyway. 11:25:23 AM: *** Sam has signed off (EOF From client) 11:25:23 AM: <Ted> Ooops 11:25:53 AM: <jon> ug. my connection keeps dropping out. 11:26:45 AM: <jon> geir: +1 for you being over velocity 11:27:24 AM: <dlh> Jon, did you miss all the stuff about who's taking what subproject? If you did, I wrote it down and can catch you up. 11:28:00 AM: <jon> nope. i think i have it. 11:28:21 AM: <jon> dfs: I would be +1 to merging the regexp and oro packages 11:28:33 AM: <jon> just make another build target in oro or something. 11:28:47 AM: <dfs> ok, i'll start looking into what would be involved. 11:28:57 AM: *** Sam (-rubys@ss09.ny.us.ibm.com) joined #jakarta 11:29:06 AM: <Ted> Getting back to coverage, we're looking for 11:29:08 AM: <Sam> I'm back...line dropped 11:29:21 AM: <Sam> What I had was 11:29:23 AM: <Sam> alexandria: Sam 11:29:26 AM: <Sam> Ant: Diane 11:29:29 AM: <Ted> ECS, Jetspeed, JMeter, Turbine, TC3 11:29:39 AM: <Sam> Avalon: Peter 11:29:45 AM: <Sam> ECS I presume is Jon? 11:29:47 AM: <jon> yes 11:29:50 AM: <jon> turbine me 11:29:56 AM: <jon> jetspeed me 11:30:04 AM: <jon> i would like someone else to take jmeter 11:30:06 AM: <Sam> Turbine is also JVZ.. 11:30:11 AM: <jon> ok 11:31:06 AM: <jason> i'll also help with jetspeed, anything turbine related. 11:31:06 AM: <Sam> Who should be primary for Turbine? My preference is to spread the work around... 11:31:11 AM: <jason> i think jon wants it, if not i can do it. 11:31:20 AM: <jon> na. give it to jason 11:31:25 AM: <jon> i need less on my plate for a bit 11:31:30 AM: <jason> ok, no problem. 11:31:47 AM: <Sam> OK, which of you for Jetspeed? 11:31:53 AM: <jon> jason 11:31:57 AM: <jason> ok 11:33:03 AM: <Sam> OK, we'll come back to jmeter 11:33:03 AM: <Sam> Log4j is clealy Ceki 11:33:03 AM: <Sam> Dfs is oro and regexp 11:33:03 AM: <cgu> yep 11:33:03 AM: <Sam> servletapi is Craig? 11:33:04 AM: <geir> (I volunteer for JMeter if need be) 11:33:09 AM: <geir> (if need be) 11:33:34 AM: <craigmcc> Yes 11:33:44 AM: <Sam> site2 is Jon? 11:34:43 AM: <Sam> Struts is Ted or Craig? 11:34:43 AM: <Ted> Really should be Craig. I'll take Taglibs. 11:34:43 AM: <craigmcc> Sounds good on both 11:34:52 AM: <jon> site2: me 11:34:53 AM: <Sam> I've got Tomcat on my list as one project...I realize that that is controversial... 11:35:26 AM: <craigmcc> In more than one way (3 vs 4, servlet container vs JSP compiler) 11:36:04 AM: <Sam> Should tomcat be split in any of the ways that you have indicated? Long term I'd love to see Jasper (not just the compiler) split out, but I'm in no hurry at the moment. 11:36:24 AM: <jon> sam: +1 11:36:38 AM: <craigmcc> I think that's probably a good topic for TOMCAT-DEV first 11:36:52 AM: <Sam> My feeling for now is to leave it at one, with Craig as the rep and let people who wish to get mad at me. 11:37:03 AM: <jon> i would like to see an official distribution of tomcat with other template languages. 11:37:13 AM: <Sam> tools is Craig? It is just moo for the moment... 11:37:32 AM: <Sam> Jon: isn't that the TDK? ;-) 11:37:32 AM: <jon> http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/jakarta-velocity/demo/ 11:37:46 AM: <jon> TDK is not an official tomcat distribution. 11:37:50 AM: <jon> neither is the above 11:37:57 AM: <craigmcc> Question: is there any widespread continued interest in tools or watchdog? 11:38:07 AM: <craigmcc> as Jakarta subprojects, I mean? 11:38:14 AM: <jon> not that i know of 11:38:15 AM: <Sam> Jon, I'm not sure what official means then. 11:38:33 AM: <jon> sam: http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/jakarta-tomcat-4.0/release/ 11:38:39 AM: <Sam> Craig: I'd like to assign these subprojects to you and let you determine what is best for them. 11:38:50 AM: <craigmcc> sounds good (re tools/watchdog) 11:39:10 AM: <craigmcc> Jon: sounds like another topic for TOMCAT-DEV 11:39:45 AM: <Sam> Jon: lets get through the assignments for now, I promise to get back to that issue. 11:40:17 AM: <Sam> Turbine is Jason 11:40:17 AM: <Sam> Velocity is Geir or Jason? 11:40:17 AM: <jason> geir 11:40:54 AM: <Sam> Cool. I think we have coverage. The only "new" assignment is Geir on jmeter, I think everything else merely represents what people are already focused on anyway. 11:41:08 AM: <craigmcc> Did you get me covering Slide? 11:42:05 AM: <Sam> Craig=slide 11:42:05 AM: <geir> If that's thought not to be appropriate, me on JMeter, that's ok 11:42:05 AM: <geir> but I am happy to take it on 11:42:05 AM: <Sam> Nobody on the PMC owns jmeter, so it needed a volunteer to step forward, so thanks Geir! 11:42:24 AM: <geir> <trying to figure out what it is> my pleasure! 11:42:28 AM: <Sam> What's good about having assignments is James's comment that unless something is assigned to somebody, it essentially is assigned to nobody. 11:42:44 AM: <jon> JAMES 11:42:47 AM: <jon> who is covering that one? 11:42:53 AM: <Sam> Does anybody feel particularly stretched by this list? 11:43:05 AM: <craigmcc> Would Peter want to cover james? 11:43:08 AM: <Sam> James=peter 11:43:13 AM: <jon> ok 11:43:36 AM: <Sam> Peter previously volunteered for it. Only fair as he seems to break it regularly ;-) 11:44:19 AM: <Sam> (James is a heavy user of Avalon) 11:44:19 AM: <craigmcc> Boy your own dogfood tastes great :-) 11:44:33 AM: <Sam> The board was concerned about not having enough people covering things. Does anybody feel like they have too much in the way of PMC assignments? 11:44:40 AM: <craigmcc> Jon, is Apache JServ now formally retired? I see you didn't migrate it 11:44:49 AM: <Sam> (I feel good, I only have alexandria!) 11:44:51 AM: <jon> it is semi migrated 11:45:01 AM: <jon> but it is dead as far as i'm concerned 11:45:10 AM: <jon> i still apply patches, but i'm not planning on making any releases 11:45:10 AM: <Sam> I didn't list the semi-migrated projects (java-*) 11:45:26 AM: <jon> i'm still not sure what to do with icalendar 11:45:39 AM: <geir> re JServ, it will remain for people who use it? 11:45:47 AM: <jon> of course 11:45:51 AM: <jon> it isn't going to be deleted. 11:46:10 AM: <jon> nothing gets deleted 11:46:18 AM: <geir> more curious about if it will finish the migration 11:46:21 AM: <Sam> Nor is icalendar ;-) [I saw the question on members, I think? ] 11:46:35 AM: <jon> yea, icalendar... 11:46:48 AM: <jon> i might tell jeff to take it off the server unless he gets a community around it 11:46:58 AM: <craigmcc> Would it fit into "Commons" (or whatever comes of that)? 11:47:00 AM: <jon> or the jetspeed people want to take it under jakarta-jetspeed-icalendar 11:47:04 AM: <Sam> OK, I will confidently report to the board that there is consensus that there is adequate coverage... 11:47:11 AM: <jon> it might also fit into the commons, but there is only one developer 11:47:30 AM: <Ted> I think we'd be OK for that. 11:47:32 AM: <geir> is he/she interested 11:47:33 AM: <jon> i would hope that the commons does not become a dumping ground 11:47:42 AM: <Ted> The release votes are by all the commons committers. 11:47:49 AM: <jon> not releases. 11:47:50 AM: <geir> there is nothing wrong with Commons holding 'mature components' :) 11:48:01 AM: <jon> commons != sourceforge 11:48:13 AM: <Ted> Jon: Agreed, we'd need a proposal 11:48:14 AM: <Sam> I agree with Jon. commons != sourceforge 11:48:20 AM: <Ted> from an interested committer. 11:48:30 AM: <jon> THREE interested committers 11:48:31 AM: <Sam> From a team of committers (3) 11:48:44 AM: jon punches sam in the arm. :-) 11:48:45 AM: <Sam> I have the same problem with j2eeunit. 11:48:52 AM: <craigmcc> Aren't we jumping the agenda a little??? 11:49:09 AM: <Sam> Fair enough, craig. Back to the agenda 11:50:03 AM: <Sam> Adequate coverage is what I will report to the board, with no objections. 11:50:03 AM: <Sam> Next is the rules for revolutionary document. 11:50:03 AM: <Sam> Ted indicated that he might be willing to take a stab at restating it as a bylaw. OK? 11:50:11 AM: <Ted> Or, a guideline document. 11:50:22 AM: <craigmcc> Fine with Ted, but I was thinking more "guidelines" than "bylaws" 11:52:29 AM: <Hans> +1, or is that +0 since I'm not going to do it ;-) 11:52:29 AM: <Ted> <punches craig on the arm> 11:52:29 AM: <geir> <such violence....> 11:52:29 AM: <Sam> Cool. I'll change ownership to Ted. Perhaps we will have an update by the next meeting? 11:52:29 AM: <Ted> +1 11:52:29 AM: <Sam> Next item is James: clarify voting rules. I have seen no progress from James. 11:52:29 AM: <Hans> Ted's updated guidlines cover this, right? 11:53:16 AM: <Sam> OK with me killing this action item, merging it with #7, and reassigning to Ted? 11:53:16 AM: *** geir has signed off (Connection reset by peer) 11:53:16 AM: *** gmj_ (-gmj@ool-18bf42e3.dyn.optonline.net) joined #jakarta 11:53:16 AM: <Sam> I'll check with James offline 11:53:18 AM: <Ted> +1, after you check. 11:53:25 AM: <Hans> Re reassign to Ted: +1 11:53:35 AM: <jon> +1 11:54:45 AM: <craigmcc> +1 11:54:45 AM: <gmj_> +1 11:54:45 AM: <Sam> OK. Let's talk about that one at 3.7... 11:54:45 AM: <Sam> Next was a clear and separate e-mail about a release plan. I think the need was satisfied even if the e-mail didn't take place. 11:54:45 AM: <Sam> I'm happy dealing with this as a part of the bylaws too. 11:54:45 AM: <Sam> Objections? 11:54:45 AM: <Hans> +1 11:54:54 AM: <Ted> Bylaws=Guideline updates? 11:55:25 AM: <Sam> Next item is proposal for CVS layout. It looks like Ceki took this one? 11:55:25 AM: <Sam> I presume that this also is just guidelines? 11:55:37 AM: <cgu> Yes, I have. 11:55:43 AM: <craigmcc> CVS layout is intimately connected to build procedures -- should they be considered together? 11:56:02 AM: <Sam> I agree with Craig (and with Ceki's note at the bottom of the page). 11:56:03 AM: <jon> we need the next step which is the build.xml defaults 11:56:36 AM: <Sam> Ceki will continue to shepard this item? 11:56:36 AM: <cgu> Yes, as you observed in an e-mail this is a collection of "best-practices" and# 11:56:36 AM: <cgu> and conventions. 11:57:20 AM: <Sam> Looks like this item is progressing...any issues that we need to address as a group? 11:57:54 AM: <cgu> Yes, I'll start the ANT part. 11:57:54 AM: <cgu> Your input is welcome as I am not an ANT expert and my build scripts are... 11:58:07 AM: <cgu> not always optimal. 11:58:20 AM: <jon> so i have heard. :-) 11:58:21 AM: <Sam> OK, I'll take a stab at some initial recommendations. 11:58:28 AM: <jon> i will help out with it for sure. :-) 11:59:20 AM: <Sam> For what it is worth, my favorite build script so far is slide's (though I have a few comments there too). 11:59:20 AM: <Sam> Next item is the bylaws. Ted took a significant pass at it. 11:59:20 AM: <Sam> What's the next step? 11:59:23 AM: <jon> eh????????? 11:59:23 AM: <jon> http://httpd.apache.org/dist/ant/ 11:59:26 AM: <jon> what is that doing there? 12:00:44 PM: <jon> hello? 12:00:48 PM: <Sam> Let's take the dist/ant question offline.... next step for the bylaws. 12:01:36 PM: <Ted> We can either vote on the current draft, or wait and roll in the Rules for 12:01:36 PM: <Ted> Revolutionaries, et cetera. 12:02:41 PM: <Sam> Ted: suggestions? 12:02:41 PM: <Ted> If the Tomcat release situation is stable 12:02:41 PM: <Ted> we might as well wait 12:02:42 PM: <jon> drwxrwxr-x 4 bodewig jakarta 512 Jan 9 04:52 ant 12:02:43 PM: <jon> ug 12:05:37 PM: <Sam> Jon: at least he got the perms right! ;-) 12:05:37 PM: <Sam> Ted: OK with me. 12:05:37 PM: <cgu> I had a remark on the voting colors: +0, -0. 12:05:37 PM: <cgu> I feel that they should be merged into 0. 12:05:37 PM: <Ted> We can roll then back, but people are still going to vote in four flavors. 12:05:37 PM: <gmj_> I think that +0 / -0 conveys information... 12:05:37 PM: <Sam> My feeling is that they both have exactly the same effect, but the "decorations" are valuable. 12:05:37 PM: <craigmcc> I agree with the value of +0 / -0 12:05:37 PM: <Sam> -0 == I'm kinda against it, but I'm willing to go along 12:05:37 PM: <gmj_> :) 12:05:37 PM: <Sam> Example: Craig with embedded build directories. 12:05:37 PM: <Sam> +0 generally means I am for it but unable to help at this time, or I am for it but don't feel strongly (or know enough) 12:05:44 PM: <Sam> OK with all? 12:05:53 PM: <jon> i just removed that directory 12:05:56 PM: <jon> it was duplicated 12:06:38 PM: <Sam> ;-) Jon is holding his own meeting ;-) 12:06:43 PM: <gmj_> (he has quorum, I guess) 12:06:56 PM: <Sam> Next item is the commons proposal... 12:07:00 PM: <jon> i just like to talk to myself 12:07:20 PM: <Ted> (or to someone the rest of us can't see ...) 12:07:47 PM: <dlh> Sam: I saw +0 as meaning, "I'm neutral, but if I *had* to vote yea or nay, I'd vote yea. And -0 as its opposite. (oops -- took a bit too long to comment on that one.) 12:07:47 PM: <Ted> Abstain," "I don't support the action but I can't help with an 12:07:47 PM: <Ted> alternative." 12:07:57 PM: <Ted> (sorry about the formatting, bad paste) 12:09:09 PM: <Ted> In the draft: -0 = Abstain, I don't support the action but I can't help with an alternative. 12:10:13 PM: <Sam> Ted: There are times when -1 means the same thing, but stronger. 12:10:13 PM: <gmj_> I think there a few meanings for +/- 0, context dependant... 12:10:13 PM: <Ted> The context here is voting on an action item. 12:10:13 PM: <Sam> If somebody wanted the servlet engine to do something disallowed by the spec, the answer is -1. PERIOD. 12:10:13 PM: <Sam> No alternative required. 12:11:28 PM: <Ted> In the draft: -1 = The action should not be performed and I am offering an explanation or alternative. 12:11:28 PM: <Sam> Diane's comment is also valid, though in practice a -1 is an abstain. 12:11:35 PM: <Sam> cgu + gmj : OK with the four flavors or do either of you feel strongly that it should be three? 12:11:51 PM: <gmj_> what? I am +1 on 4 flavors, completely... 12:12:25 PM: <cgu> My vote: 0. 12:12:26 PM: <Sam> gmj: OH, sorry, I misread your previous comment. 12:12:26 PM: <gmj_> I think I said that it conveys information - I guess I should have added 'valuable' 12:12:31 PM: <gmj_> sorry 12:12:56 PM: <Sam> OK, 4 it is. If anybody has any wording changes to propose, get them to Ted. 12:13:02 PM: <Sam> Next item? Commons? 12:13:13 PM: <cgu> OK. 12:13:42 PM: <Sam> I believe that Ted has a proposal... is it ready to be discussed? 12:14:02 PM: <jon> sure 12:14:03 PM: <Ted> http://husted.com/about/commons/ 12:14:35 PM: <gmj_> (sam : I have one item for new business for discussion after we deal with the items on the agenda) 12:15:18 PM: <gmj_> (if that's ok) 12:15:18 PM: <Sam> Do we simply want to vote? 12:16:07 PM: <craigmcc> Peter had pretty strong feelings w.r.t. overlap with Avalon's scope, but he's not here to comment at the moment 12:16:26 PM: <Sam> OK, I'm +1. It certainly has been discussed to death, and while not perfect, it can always be improved. 12:16:43 PM: <Sam> Craig: I will check with Peter offline. He pretty cleary was -1 IIRC. 12:17:05 PM: <gmj_> I'm +1, mostly because my wife will divorce me if I say up til 3:00 am arguing with Costin again :) 12:17:09 PM: <craigmcc> I think that's a fair assumption (subject to confirmation, of course0 12:18:10 PM: <Ted> +1 for the Commons proposal 12:18:15 PM: <gmj_> Ted : I burned out - what was the resolution with Costin re Agora? 12:18:31 PM: <Sam> Peter's primary issue was overlap. In general there is support all the way to the board on overlap when there is a different approach being taken. 12:18:50 PM: <Ted> Re Agora. There's some minor changes to the wording at 12:19:00 PM: <Ted> http://husted.com/about/commons/prop03.html 12:19:08 PM: <Ted> which makes the shared repository less common-centric 12:19:24 PM: <gmj_> so that would be something we resolve later? 12:19:35 PM: <Sam> Ted: you WILL start moving this stuff to Jakarta, RIGHT? :-) 12:19:42 PM: <Ted> Yes. 12:20:01 PM: <gmj_> 'later' or 'move' ? :) 12:20:16 PM: <Ted> Yes on move. 12:20:36 PM: <Ted> On later, Costin really needs to make his own proposal for 12:20:38 PM: <Ted> Agora. I 12:20:51 PM: <Ted> I'm just trying to give him a chance to try it out. 12:21:02 PM: <gmj_> so could we bring that into Commons as an indep entity just like a DBCP? 12:21:16 PM: <gmj_> or a sep proposal for the PMC? 12:21:30 PM: <Ted> He can do whatever he wants in the shared repository. 12:21:45 PM: <Ted> as long as it get released by an actual subproject. 12:21:55 PM: <craigmcc> As I understand it, Costin wants something with different rules .. hence a different proposal to PMC 12:22:02 PM: <Sam> ceki? craig? daniel? diane? hans? jason? jon? 12:22:14 PM: <jason> i'm +1 12:22:23 PM: <craigmcc> Which version are we actually voting on? prop03? 12:22:33 PM: <gmj_> that was sort of where I was going... 12:23:00 PM: <Hans> I'm +1 on Commons. Like you said, there may be details that are not right but that can be fixed later. 12:23:00 PM: <dfs> +1 on the Commons. I was just reading the latest proposal and it addressed some of my questions. 12:23:07 PM: <Ted> There's no functional difference between the original proposal and 03 12:23:13 PM: <Ted> But we'd have to be voting on the original. 12:23:16 PM: <craigmcc> +1 on prop03 (I didn't like point 20 on prop02, so Geir's wife can blame me for the last cycle of discussion :-) 12:23:30 PM: <jon> i'm +1 on commons, but i don't see it being much of a success. to much discussion and very little code. 12:23:52 PM: <dlh> I'm hearing about it (and trying to speed-read the proposal), but I like the idea so far, so +1 for me as well. 12:23:59 PM: <dfs> prop03 was more detailed i read what i thought to be the original out of my mailbox (Mar 06 email [PROPOSAL[ The Commons) 12:24:14 PM: <dlh> Ooops -- meant to say "hearing about it for the first time today"... 12:24:22 PM: <Sam> jon: to date it is NOT a success yet. Hopefully it will progress from idea to incubator shortly. 12:24:46 PM: <Sam> ceki? 12:24:50 PM: <craigmcc> We're trying to have process preceed code in this case, so it's not surprising there is no code yet 12:24:51 PM: <cgu> I'd like to give the proposal a chance: +1. 12:25:15 PM: <jon> +0 12:25:41 PM: <Sam> Jon: is that a change (I read a +1 further up) or simply a comment? 12:26:41 PM: <jon> yea, +0 from me. 12:26:44 PM: <jon> that is my final answer 12:26:56 PM: <jon> i forgot that +1 means that i'm expected to help out 12:28:11 PM: <Sam> OK, we have 9 +1's and 1 +0. Even with Peter's assumed -1, I'd say this passes. 12:28:32 PM: <gmj_> woo hoo! 12:28:44 PM: <Sam> Before going on to the next item, does anybody have a hard stop coming up? 12:28:53 PM: <Ted> For the record, the guidelines say "approval" 12:28:57 PM: <craigmcc> (By the way, Avalon has a DBCP buried inside too :-) 12:29:00 PM: <Ted> is a +0 an approval 12:29:07 PM: <gmj_> (so it claims....) 12:29:22 PM: <dlh> What's a "DBCP"? 12:29:28 PM: <Sam> Craig: absolutely. I believe that it is the one that cocoon2 uses. 12:29:29 PM: <gmj_> Database Connection Pool 12:29:56 PM: <Sam> We have a lot of them. Most of them require that you learn the sponsoring framework. That's the issue. 12:31:36 PM: <craigmcc> Yep ... it's framework dependent as well. But a useful source for ideas. 12:31:36 PM: <Sam> It's not exactly the next item, but Geir wanted to talk about poolman, and it seems relevant to the topic at hand... 12:31:36 PM: <Sam> Geir, what's up with poolman? 12:33:38 PM: <Sam> gmj? 12:33:38 PM: <Sam> Oh, well. Next item on the agenda is the PMC election process... 12:33:38 PM: <Sam> The board is about to have an election for all its seats. The XML PMC just did the same. Should we consider a process like this for Jakarta? 12:35:30 PM: <cgu> Oh yes. 12:35:30 PM: <Sam> What's the right size? What's the right time? 12:35:30 PM: <cgu> What is the exact procedure for the XML PMC? 12:35:30 PM: <cgu> Can you expand? 12:35:56 PM: <Sam> The XML PMC was recently disbanded due to lack of interest...what they did to bootstrap another one was 12:35:59 PM: <jon> i'm confused, we just did pmc elections 12:36:33 PM: <Sam> (jon: I would like to review the process itself based on what we learned) 12:37:00 PM: <Ted> We should consider a similar for next year, before the chair is re-elected. 12:37:49 PM: <Sam> In the XML PMC they solicited volunteers. Then they decided that there was going to be 5 slots in the PMC, and had an election where every committer could vote. 12:37:51 PM: <Sam> Votes were tallied in private. 12:40:56 PM: <Sam> There was concerns that having other people know your vote would affect how you voted. (I'm not sympathetic to this, myself). 12:40:56 PM: <Sam> Ted: the chair is not likely to be re-elected. I am likely to either succeed and retire or fail and get kicked out... ;-) 12:42:36 PM: <Sam> Ted: care to write up a proposal? I can forward you on the data from the XML PMC... 12:42:36 PM: <Sam> 14 going on 12...Anil is also bowing out. 12:42:36 PM: <Ted> You mean I jus didn't ;-0 12:42:36 PM: <craigmcc> The breadth of Jakarta makes the coverage issue harder as we add more subprojects 12:42:36 PM: <craigmcc> BTW: Who gets Commons now that it is approved? 12:42:42 PM: <gmj_> ted 12:42:48 PM: <Ted> +1 12:42:50 PM: <craigmcc> +1 12:42:52 PM: <Sam> +1 on Ted owning commons 12:43:03 PM: <jon> +1 on Ted owning commons 12:43:06 PM: <jon> he started it. :-) 12:43:18 PM: <Ted> Actually, Geir started it. I ran with it. 12:43:21 PM: *** Hans (+hans@1Cust230.tnt2.redondo-beach.ca.da.uu.net) joined #jakarta 12:43:39 PM: <gmj_> Run you did... 12:43:40 PM: <Sam> re: breadth issue. Suggestions? 12:43:48 PM: <Hans> Sorry about that; power is off in LA. I'm with you as long as the batteries last :-) 12:43:57 PM: <gmj_> really? 12:44:00 PM: <gmj_> wow 12:44:00 PM: <jon> yup 12:44:11 PM: <jon> people on collabnet irc are talking about it as well. :-) 12:44:34 PM: <cgu> Craig: a PMC member can delegate his work covering a project to another committer. 12:44:35 PM: <gmj_> I thought they had their own power... 12:44:38 PM: <dlh> Is it a rolling blackout, or did something actually happen? 12:44:44 PM: <gmj_> CNN says rolling 12:44:50 PM: <Hans> Power loss: so it's wide spread? 12:45:26 PM: <craigmcc> Breadth: (a) increase PMC size proporionately, (b) divide PMC, (c) limit scope of Jakarta 12:45:32 PM: <jon> actually, it also went out in SF 12:45:38 PM: <jon> it was SF not LA 12:45:52 PM: <cgu> (b) 12:46:07 PM: <Sam> ceki: how? 12:46:47 PM: <craigmcc> Ceki: Delegation works for detailed work, but not for oversight 12:46:47 PM: <gmj_> I think that the scope will naturally expand as Java in server-land grows in popularity 12:46:47 PM: <dlh> Are there currently requirements for adding a subproject? Should one of them be that it should have someone on the PMC before it can become one? 12:47:12 PM: <Ted> Technically, a PMC member has to tender the proposal. 12:47:19 PM: <gmj_> is that true? 12:47:26 PM: <jon> requirements aren't well defined for adding a subproject 12:47:28 PM: <Sam> Diane: one of the things hotly discussed in the XML PMC was whether or not there should be 1-1 representation. 12:47:29 PM: <craigmcc> Diane: proposal to PMC (i guess sponsored by a PMC member?) 12:48:07 PM: <Ted> 1:1 sounds problematic. 12:48:07 PM: <Sam> Scott Boag felt that there should be 1-1. I took the splitting of avalon as a counter-example. 12:48:33 PM: <cgu> A PMC member can ask a committer(s) to do a report on a given project. 12:48:33 PM: <craigmcc> Same if Tomcat gets split along any of the dimensions 12:48:33 PM: <dlh> Okay -- but should it be a requirment that your new subproject has someone who's willing&able to be its PMC rep before you can have it become one? 12:48:33 PM: <Ted> I also think "representatoin" is a misnomer. 12:49:00 PM: <cgu> The PMC member cam base his/her decisions on this report and his/her own digging. 12:49:04 PM: <Sam> Representation should include oversight. In particular watching out for things like licensing issues and security problems. 12:49:54 PM: <Sam> The XML project decided that representation was a non-goal. 12:50:17 PM: <Ted> +1 = representation=non-goal 12:50:21 PM: <Sam> I'd like to keep it as a goal for Jakarta. 12:50:43 PM: <Ted> We're not making the technical decisions 12:50:50 PM: <Ted> so what are we representing? 12:51:58 PM: <cgu> +1 = representation=non-goal 12:51:58 PM: <Ted> My understanding is that our primary duty is 12:51:58 PM: <Ted> licensing and security 12:51:58 PM: <Ted> Anything else is just added-value 12:52:03 PM: <Sam> How many people does it take to do that for a project of this size? 12:52:25 PM: <Ted> I think we're trying to discover that with the current expansion 12:54:11 PM: <Hans> Also, estabishing guidelines and making sure they are followed, making sure the project is within the charter, resolve conflicts, etc. 12:54:11 PM: <Sam> I think to do what Hans is describing at a minimum means following the -dev mailing list on a fairly regular basis. 12:54:11 PM: <Hans> Yes. Example: making sure the servlet spec is not violated in Tomcat 12:54:18 PM: <Ted> +1 - we should follow the dev list and advise the PMC 12:54:26 PM: <Ted> on a product's development 12:54:44 PM: <Sam> Ted: so, should we split up the dev lists... you see where I'm heading... ;-) 12:54:56 PM: <Ted> Yes, like we just did, really. 12:55:29 PM: <Sam> So subproject representation, while not an explicit goal, is a good cross check? 12:55:34 PM: <Ted> representation != coverage 12:55:42 PM: <cgu> Hans: how is Tomcat not following the spec any of PMC's business? 12:56:03 PM: <gmj_> isn't the spec their charter? 12:56:09 PM: <Sam> Ceki: it is part of the charter for Tomcat. We might not do a good job of writing it down, but it is nonetheless 12:56:27 PM: <Hans> Because the charter for Tomcat is to be the reference implementation of the spec; if it breaks it, it's not within its charter 12:56:32 PM: <Sam> The charter for Tomcat is actually based on an explicit agreement between the ASF board and Sun. 12:56:42 PM: <cgu> Thanks. 12:57:00 PM: <cgu> I did not know that. 12:57:26 PM: <Sam> Ted, so coverage is an explicit goal? 12:57:59 PM: <craigmcc> Could someone define what we mean by "representation" and "coverage"? 12:58:12 PM: <Ted> Yes. To do our job, someone has to following each dev list 12:58:19 PM: <Ted> and reporting developments 12:58:56 PM: <Sam> (I'm with Craig. I'm confused...such people report but not represent?) 12:59:21 PM: <Ted> I can "cover" Taglibs, but can't really represent it right now 12:59:29 PM: <Ted> since I'm not one of the core developers. 12:59:45 PM: <Ted> If representation is the goal, then we would need someone like 12:59:50 PM: <Ted> Morgan or Glen here. 1:00:18 PM: <gmj_> I was planning to dive into JMeter... 1:00:49 PM: <Sam> I guess the key question is whether or not the taglibs team would be comfortable with you covering and representing them (and same thing is true for jmeter/geir) 1:01:28 PM: <Ted> The rub is that being a good developer doesn't make you 1:01:35 PM: <gmj_> I was going to ask them, honestly 1:01:37 PM: <Sam> Lets check on this at the next meeting and take appropriate actions if necessary. 1:01:43 PM: <Ted> a good PMC member. 1:01:49 PM: <gmj_> and more importantly, try to participate in the project 1:02:09 PM: <Sam> Geir, care to comment on poolman? 1:02:12 PM: <gmj_> sure 1:02:36 PM: <gmj_> I have been taking to Sean Nevill, the primary(?) author of Poolman, a good DBCP 1:02:52 PM: <gmj_> I was sounding out his interest 1:03:01 PM: <gmj_> in bringing the project to Jakarta, and he is interested 1:03:08 PM: <gmj_> I think this is a project of 'heft 1:03:26 PM: <gmj_> equal to some others, so the question is does it go into Commons, or do we consider it as a 'regular' project 1:03:33 PM: <gmj_> I have clients that use it 1:03:42 PM: <gmj_> Sean appears to really, really be on the ball with this stuff 1:04:01 PM: <gmj_> He is aware of the licensing issues, from LGPL to ASL 1:04:11 PM: <gmj_> and has a group that would be considered 'committers' 1:04:16 PM: <gmj_> <ok> 1:04:53 PM: <Sam> Geir - Suggestions? 1:05:14 PM: <gmj_> He is aware of the Commons proposal - I directed him to read the library-dev list, and he seems ok with either 1:05:17 PM: <gmj_> so suggestions : 1:05:36 PM: <gmj_> the big question is do we want to bring that in from outside, given the amount of DBCP code we have floating about 1:05:42 PM: <gmj_> I think it would be a good thing 1:05:59 PM: <gmj_> if we agree we want to bring it in, then 'where?' is the question 1:06:09 PM: <gmj_> It would be a great start to Commons 1:06:12 PM: <Sam> outside may solve territorial problems ;-) 1:06:26 PM: <cgu> Question: would Sean+team agree to a license change? 1:06:28 PM: <gmj_> it would, and we would have a very good pool 1:06:30 PM: <gmj_> yes 1:06:32 PM: <gmj_> they would agree 1:06:36 PM: <craigmcc> I'm +1 for having *all* DBCP stuff in one place -- inside or outside commons matters not to me 1:06:44 PM: <gmj_> he just beta-ed v2.0 1:06:51 PM: <gmj_> and thinks that is the right place to switch licenses 1:07:02 PM: <Sam> OK, it sounds like this should be discussed on library-dev (or commons-dev once the list is created) with votes for new committers and a review of the code. 1:07:28 PM: <Sam> Agreed? 1:07:32 PM: *** Sam has signed off (EOF From client) 1:07:34 PM: <Ted> +1 1:07:50 PM: <dlh> +1 1:07:52 PM: <jon> +0 1:08:01 PM: <Hans> +0 1:08:04 PM: <gmj_> I agree, but wish to be able to bring it back if we scare off Sean :) 1:08:09 PM: <gmj_> (back here) 1:08:18 PM: <gmj_> (shall we wait for sam?) 1:08:51 PM: <cgu> Yes, let's wait. 1:10:34 PM: <jon> [HUMOR] Swedish Chef interface to Google 1:10:37 PM: <jon> <http://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=xx-bork> 1:11:13 PM: <dlh> Anyone have any recommendations for monitors, while we wait?... 1:11:14 PM: <jon> sorry humor break 1:11:21 PM: <jon> iiyama monitors kick ass 1:11:34 PM: <jon> www.iiyama.com 1:12:02 PM: *** sam (-rubys@ss01.nc.us.ibm.com) joined #jakarta 1:12:05 PM: *** sam has signed off (EOF From client) 1:12:05 PM: <jon> http://www.iiyamadirect.com/iiyamadirect/all_product.asp 1:12:19 PM: <jon> they have good prices at their outlet shop 1:12:26 PM: <jon> i have 2 19" monitors from there. 1:12:40 PM: *** sam (-rubys@ss02.nc.us.ibm.com) joined #jakarta 1:12:41 PM: <jon> the vision master pro 450's 1:12:45 PM: *** sam has signed off (EOF From client) 1:12:45 PM: <jon> hi sam 1:12:49 PM: <jon> bye sam 1:13:24 PM: <gmj_> I used to use an Iiyama at work - nice monitor 1:13:30 PM: *** Sam (-rubys@ss05.ny.us.ibm.com) joined #jakarta 1:13:35 PM: <dfs> re: DBCP conclusion +0 (since jon pointed out that a +1 means you're going to help with the process) 1:13:38 PM: <jon> hi sam 1:13:47 PM: <gmj_> come to the light, sam 1:13:50 PM: <Sam> Let's see how long I stay in this time... 1:14:10 PM: <jon> damn ibm network. :-) 1:14:19 PM: <gmj_> I had the following queued up : 1:14:22 PM: <Sam> Jon: Yes, I should have worked from home. 1:14:33 PM: <gmj_> so I intepret this to mean that right now, the PMC is not favorable to making this a top-level project, but would rather see if it can find a home in Commons? 1:14:44 PM: <jon> geir: yes 1:14:53 PM: <jon> i am -1 on a top level DBCP project 1:15:04 PM: <cgu> Shouldn't we ask Sean+team first about where they want to be? 1:15:08 PM: <Hans> I have about 30 minutes left on my batteries. CNN now states that this is a rolling blackout, so I may not get power back in time to hang around until the ned. 1:15:11 PM: <gmj_> they are fine with either 1:15:16 PM: <gmj_> I already checked that out 1:15:25 PM: <gmj_> I will find out the preference 1:15:43 PM: <Hans> I noticed that the last point on the agenda was "PMC member status changes" Can we bring that up sooner? 1:15:53 PM: <gmj_> but - I think it is on par with Ant, Regexp/Oro etc as a widely used tool.... 1:16:04 PM: <Sam> So, if the commons subproject is agreeable, you'll preceed with that, and we can always reassess later? 1:16:06 PM: <gmj_> I mean, every framework in Jakarta has their own :) 1:16:12 PM: <gmj_> sam : ok 1:16:38 PM: <Sam> It looks like Hans wants to quit on me now. OK, let's let him go if that is what he really wishes. 1:17:05 PM: <Sam> Hans? Care to say a few words? 1:17:23 PM: <Hans> I take that as my cue. Yes, I have announced that I want to leave the PMC, primarily because lack of time to do a good job. 1:17:47 PM: <jon> so long and thanks for all the fish! :-) 1:17:59 PM: <Hans> I believe in Jakarta, but feel that it's time for a "new crew". So I leave and offer my place to someone else. 1:18:22 PM: <Hans> Jon: ;-) I love that book! 1:18:46 PM: <Sam> I can't honestly say that I really got a good chance to get to know you...I'm still fairly new here myself. But we generally seemed to be on the same side on most issues... Thanks and good luck! 1:18:59 PM: <Hans> Thanks 1:19:08 PM: <Sam> Care to keep subscribed to the pmc list? Anybody object? 1:19:30 PM: <craigmcc> No objection here ... emeratie status should work for members, not just chair 1:19:37 PM: <jon> +1 1:19:39 PM: <jon> +0 1:19:40 PM: <jon> :-) 1:20:06 PM: <Hans> I don't think I should, but that's up to you. And I'll be around in the other lists and may chip in now and then. 1:20:08 PM: <craigmcc> Jon: you mean you're not going to help kick him out? :-) 1:20:46 PM: <Sam> My feeling is that you are more than welcome to keep on. 1:21:52 PM: <Sam> As I alluded to previously, Anil also indicated that he wanted to leave. My feeling is that we don't need to initiate searches for replacements in that we just found 7 new faces for the 2 existing chairs. Comments? 1:22:27 PM: <craigmcc> As long as we have everything currently covered, I think we're ok 1:22:33 PM: <jon> i was +0 on keeping him on the list. :-) 1:22:39 PM: <jon> i can't help do that one. 1:22:55 PM: <jon> i think we are ok. 1:23:44 PM: <Sam> OK, the last item I wanted to cover before Jon's walk on items was subproject status. What subprojects are planning imminent releases? 1:23:50 PM: <dlh> Well, I wouldn't mind bringing someone else in to help cover/represent Ant, since I'm so completely new to all of this (open-source and Java and all). 1:24:06 PM: <gmj_> Velocity! 1:24:11 PM: <gmj_> :) 1:24:13 PM: <Sam> Diane, I will help watch over Ant. 1:24:27 PM: <dlh> Cool. (And thanks!) 1:24:29 PM: <Ted> Taglibs just released a set of JDBC tags, which are Struts compatible. 1:24:34 PM: <craigmcc> Tomcat 3.2.2 is imminent (including the security fix for the cross-scripting vulnerability) 1:24:44 PM: <jon> Velocity is doing a release on April 2nd 1:24:46 PM: <gmj_> Velocity is preparing the 1.0 code freeze tonight 1:24:48 PM: <craigmcc> Tomcat 3.3-dev and 4.0-dev have also been patched for that 1:24:53 PM: <jon> 1.0b1 is today 1:25:07 PM: <Sam> When is 4.0 of Tomcat? I've lost track of 4.1... 1:25:24 PM: <jon> turbine is hopefully the javaone timeframe 1:25:42 PM: <craigmcc> 4.1 no longer exists ... it's a fair-length story but might be of interest to PMC 1:25:52 PM: <gmj_> I'm interested 1:26:02 PM: <jon> i'm interested 1:26:03 PM: <jason> me too 1:26:06 PM: <Sam> I've got a new logo for Gump ;-), but more seriously I've actually started on some docs. And I see there is a new Ant based version being contributed... 1:26:09 PM: <craigmcc> bottom line: ASF (as an executive member of the Java Community Process) is bound by the same release rules as all vendors are. 1:26:12 PM: <Sam> I'm interested... 1:26:26 PM: <Sam> (I was holding back on an item until 4.1...) 1:26:33 PM: <craigmcc> In particular, we cannot release a "Tomcat 4.0 Final" until the specs it implements go final (roughly October on the current time frame) 1:27:06 PM: <jon> makes sense 1:27:08 PM: <Sam> I noticed a non-backwards compatible change that just went in (broke j2eeunit), so waiting until October seems wise. 1:27:19 PM: <craigmcc> Given that, I'm going to be proposing to TOMCAT-DEV that we keep adding functionality in beta releases of 4.0 (essentially turning them back into milestones) 1:27:44 PM: <craigmcc> which change? (BTW Vincent is contributing specific J2EEUnit tests to STruts) 1:27:44 PM: <jon> the C connector support seems pretty hosed as well. 1:28:02 PM: <Sam> Let me know when/if I can make scriptlets do as they were always meant to ;-) 1:28:09 PM: <craigmcc> Jon: yah, that's a sore point with me. 1:28:44 PM: <Sam> Craig: I've been waiting until you told me it was Monday yet... ;-) 1:28:57 PM: <craigmcc> Sam: I'd say go ahead and start now, but on a branch please until J2EE RI final 1:29:14 PM: <craigmcc> Sam: Well I did, about 18 Mondays ago, but you must have missed it :-) 1:29:31 PM: <Sam> I don't want a branch. I've been manually merging for over a year! Grumble, grumble, grumble. 1:30:04 PM: <Sam> I've got it to the point where everything is completely and 100% optional. If you don't specifically ask for it, the support isn't even present. 1:30:23 PM: <craigmcc> I'd say, pitch it to TOMCAT-DEV and then check it in 1:30:24 PM: <Hans> Okay, my batteries are empty. By, and have fun! 1:30:25 PM: <Sam> 18 mondays ago you told me to put it into 4.1 1:30:34 PM: <gmj_> Bye Hans 1:30:45 PM: <Sam> Bye Hans, and thanks! 1:31:10 PM: <jon> hey guys, this is a tomcat-dev discussion. :-) 1:31:16 PM: <jon> my turn to steer on track 1:31:46 PM: <Sam> Fair enough. One thing that would be nice would be a place on the site whereby current status and outlook is available. Thought? 1:31:55 PM: *** Hans has signed off () 1:32:09 PM: <craigmcc> You mean a global STATUS for all projects? good idea 1:33:09 PM: <dlh> Sam: In what way different from the "News & Status" link? 1:33:29 PM: <cgu> What would be the global status of a project? 1:33:31 PM: <Sam> OK, I'll act as an editor for this, and will tap on the identified representatives(oops, person covering the areas) 1:34:10 PM: <Sam> I don't believe that we have the information such as was just discussed (minus the TC tangent) anyplace. 1:34:42 PM: <dfs> sorry, i got tied up with some work stuff and missed a bit of the last. anyway, i think a current status and roadmap page is a good idea. 1:35:43 PM: <Sam> OK, next item: Jon wanted to talk about official tomcat releases with other configurations. Isn't this a tomcat issue? 1:36:50 PM: <Sam> Meanwhile, when shuold the next meeting be? April 16th at the same time? 1:37:21 PM: <gmj_> this time works for me - what happened to Peter? 1:37:22 PM: <craigmcc> April 16 is fine by me. 1:37:42 PM: <jason> apr 16 is good for me too. 1:37:47 PM: <dlh> Ditto 1:37:52 PM: <Ted> +1 1:38:14 PM: <dfs> +1 1:38:46 PM: <Sam> Is jon still here? 1:38:54 PM: <cgu> +1 1:39:39 PM: <jon> sorry 1:39:55 PM: <jon> the global status is the news and status link 1:40:16 PM: <jon> +1 on april 16th. 1:40:38 PM: <jon> sam: we can defer the official tomcat releases with other distributions to tomcat-dev 1:41:10 PM: <Sam> I'd like a place for status such as 4.0 in October, Velocity 1.0bx "real soon now", etc. 1:41:21 PM: <Sam> In other words, not sorted by date, but sorted by subproject. 1:42:02 PM: <Sam> Objections? 1:42:16 PM: <Ted> Wouldn't that replicate what should be on the subproject's site? 1:42:22 PM: <craigmcc> You'll need room for multiple entries for subproject (i.e. 3.2/3.3/4.0) 1:42:43 PM: <Ted> The subproject's should have their own News and Status page. 1:42:46 PM: <jon> sam: i think that each project should manage that on their own. 1:42:53 PM: <jon> ted: i agree 1:42:59 PM: <Ted> and the top level page should scroll content from those 1:43:15 PM: <Ted> One thing covering a product should mean is to be sure the Site2 pages 1:43:18 PM: <Ted> are updated too. 1:43:37 PM: <Ted> Like I will do for taglibs later per our latest release. 1:44:14 PM: <Sam> I agree with distributing the work - what I am fuzzy on how to 1:44:22 PM: <Sam> "scroll content from those" 1:44:44 PM: <Ted> Well, taglibs is about to release a tag that would do that (scrape) ;-) 1:44:49 PM: <Sam> Right now it is right tedious trying to get a global perspective... 1:44:58 PM: <Ted> but I was just thinking of cross-posting by hand. 1:45:48 PM: <Sam> Cross-posting by hand, and dividing up the work is fine with me. I would just like one place to goto for overall status and plans - not just history (like news and status currently is). 1:46:10 PM: <Ted> We could link to the various status pages from the Site2 page. 1:46:39 PM: <jon> sam: projects have a hard enough time updating their own STATUS, do you think that they would update yet another page? 1:46:45 PM: <Sam> A link in ADDITION to a summary would be a good idea. 1:46:52 PM: <dlh> Could I get a pointer to the "Site2 page"? 1:47:09 PM: <Sam> http://jakarta.apache.org/sites/news.html 1:47:22 PM: <jon> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html 1:47:28 PM: <dlh> D'oh! -- that's the page I'm looking at. :) 1:47:36 PM: <jason> maybe we could use anakia to transform all the subproject status pages into a global status page. 1:47:55 PM: <jason> if we agreed on formatting, it could probably be done. 1:48:10 PM: <jon> yes, we could do that. 1:48:18 PM: <Ted> I think the date ordering is useful, though. 1:48:47 PM: <Sam> OK, we got a lot of technicians here, I'm sure we can figure out HOW. The question is whether or not it is useful to have multiple views on this same data. 1:48:49 PM: <Ted> There might be a strong link between what we would want on the top of the 1:49:03 PM: <Ted> News and Status page and what has gone out on Jakarta-Announce 1:50:51 PM: <Sam> OK, I've got to run. Let's continue this discusson on General. Meanwhile, I'll take a stab at an outline, and perhaps jason/ted or others can help figure out how to automate it. 1:51:17 PM: <Sam> Jon, you'll post the log? 1:51:23 PM: <jon> yup 1:51:35 PM: <Sam> OK, I move to adjourn. ;-) 1:51:39 PM: <jon> +1 1:51:40 PM: <gmj_> second 1:51:42 PM: <jason> +1 1:51:44 PM: <Ted> +1 1:51:46 PM: <cgu> +1 1:51:49 PM: <dlh> +1 1:51:52 PM: <Sam> Thanks everyone! 1:51:58 PM: <gmj_> thanks, sam 1:52:03 PM: <jason> thanks, bye

About Jakarta

About Apache

Retired Subprojects