incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason van Zyl <>
Subject Re: [Possible Incubation] Apache Repo
Date Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:02:54 GMT
On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 12:16, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> peter royal wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 2003, at 11:29 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > 
> >> The developers of Ruper in the meantime have become Apache committers 
> >> (two for Gump and one is coming in with JUDDI). The issue here is that 
> >> Maven already has some code for this, and 
> >> is partecipating too.
> >>
> >> If you want to call it "Incubating Ruper and have others join" it's ok 
> >> for me, as my initial idea is to use Ruper as a starting codebase, and 
> >> have others add stuff, but I didn't want to make this a prerequisite 
> >> for a Repo project.
> > 
> > The initial email wasn't clear about what codebases would be part of 
> > this initiative.
> > 
> > So if Ruper is the codebase that would be attached, the initiative 
> > should be re-titled as you suggest.
>  >
> > This really smells like an extension and abstraction of what Maven 
> > provides and initiated. Why not do this effort under their umbrella?
> There is no need to be provocative, Peter.
> The Krysalis jar repository effort started well before we ever knew of 
> the Maven one, by using Jakarta Commons JJAR. Actually the Maven one had 
> not even stared at that time.)

I am not trying to stir the pot here, but you really can't make
statements that are purely conjecture and not be held accountable. It's
simply not fair to insinuate there is validity in your efforts simply
because you think you started first.

It doesn't matter who started first because different implementations
are not a bad thing, but please Nicola get your facts straight. You used
JJAR for your first implementation, yes? Then I'm not sure how it has
come to pass that you don't know that JJAR was written as a direct
result of my discussions with Geir and it was for the express purpose of
using a repository of JARs and I didn't see you on the scene anywhere
for quite some time after it's creation. Maven started in Alexandria and
moved to Turbine which is where most people think it started.

Using a repository isn't a revelation, the idea has been in existence
long before either of us came around. But that's not my point, the point
is it neither matters who was first (because there's probably someone
who tried this long before either of our efforts if we actually looked)
and using that as a reason for the existence of a codebase is a
pointless one. If you have another implementation of something akin to
what Maven does then that's completely fine but let it stand on its
merit and stop pointing your fingers at Maven. 

If you want to incubate Ruper then say so. That's perfectly valid. It is
also perfectly valid to have a competitor to aspects of the
functionality of Maven. I have no problem with that, but stop calling it
a grand community effort while intoning that Maven is devoid of a
community persuing these same things that you are talking about in
addition to dismissing the Maven developers a close minded bunch because
we chose a path (i.e. not merging with your effort) that we considered
was in Maven's best interest. 

> There have been multiple requests from us to merge efforts, but to no 
> avail. 

You have cited this reason many, many times but what you originally
asked for was entirely unreasonable. You asked for an entire merger of
codebases and developers which the Maven committers were not prepared to
accept. It was posed essentially as an ultimatum which stated that a
flat out merger was the only acceptable solution. You decided not to
participate and the situation was made worse when essentially implied
the Maven developers were a bunch of thieves or more specifically that I
took your idea and ran with it.

> I don't see why would an indipendent and cross-project repository effort 
> and library have to be under Maven.

It certainly doesn't but you also can't ignore what Maven has done for
the notion of a repository.

In any case I think that if you wish to incubate Ruper then I am +1.


Jason van Zyl

In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
  -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message