incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Carman" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] accept Olio into incubation
Date Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:01:07 GMT
+1 (non-binding)

I've informed the Wicket team about this incubator request and there
is interest in providing a wicket-based implementation (wicket along
with differing ORM technologies of course, like JPA and Hibernate; the
way I envision it, we'll use profiles in maven to turn on/off
different implementations).  When do you think it'd be a good time to
add implementations to the mix?  During incubation?  After it
graduates?  Is there a requirements document or something for
applications wishing to "implement" the Olio example application?

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Matt Hogstrom <> wrote:
> +1  (binding)
> Note: I updated the proposal on the Wiki with my normal e-mail account
> ( instead of my work e-mail ( since my
> mentoring of this project is unrelated to any aspect of my work
> responsibilities).
> On Sep 23, 2008, at 10:33 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Please vote on accepting Olio into incubation.
>> The proposal can be found at:
>> [This proposal was formerly known as Web20Kit]
>> The text of the proposal:
>> OlioProposal
>> Abstract
>> Apache Olio is a web 2.0 toolkit to help developers evaluate the
>> suitability, functionality and performance of various web technologies by
>> implementing a reasonably complex application in several different
>> technologies.
>> Proposal
>> Olio will develop an example application to understand the benefits,
>> performance, and scalability of popular web technologies. Multiple
>> implementations of the application are planned - each providing the same
>> functionality but staying true to the philosophy of its base
>> language/framework.
>> Background
>> Most web 2.0 sites today use open source languages and frameworks such as
>> PHP, Ruby on Rails, and Java EE to develop their applications. Deployments
>> of these applications also use popular open source servers such as Apache
>> httpd, Tomcat, MySQL, Memcache, and Glassfish. Many other
>> servers/technologies such as lighttpd, mogileFS, mongrels, JRuby are also
>> gaining popularity.
>> With the myriad technologies available, it is not easy to understand how
>> they differ, especially in terms of performance and scalability. With varied
>> levels of documentation available for some open source applications, it is
>> also quite difficult for a web 2.0 startup to understand the correct usage
>> of these technologies so that they don't become a bottleneck as their site
>> grows.
>> Rationale
>> Olio is a toolkit that will attempt to address the above issues.
>> What it does
>> Olio defines an example web 2.0 application (the initial implementation
>> uses an events site somewhat like and provides three
>> implementations: PHP, Java EE, and Ruby on Rails. The toolkit will also
>> define ways to drive load against the application in order to measure
>> performance.
>> As developers join the project, they can implement the same application
>> using their favorite web frameworks and compare their implementations to
>> others.
>> What you can learn from it
>> a) Understand how to use various web 2.0 technologies such as AJAX,
>> memcached, mogileFS etc. in the creation of your own application. Use the
>> code in the application to understand the subtle complexities involved and
>> how to get around issues with these technologies.
>> b) Evaluate the differences in the implementations: PHP, Ruby on Rails,
>> Java EE, and other contributed implementations to understand which might
>> best work for your situation.
>> c) Within each language implementation, evaluate different infrastructure
>> technologies by changing the servers used (e.g: apache vs lighttpd, MySQL vs
>> PostgreSQL, Ruby vs Jruby etc.)
>> d) Drive load against the application to evaluate the performance and
>> scalability of the chosen platform.
>> e) Experiment with different algorithms (e.g. memcache locking, a
>> different DB access API) by replacing portions of code in the application.
>> A robust, community-developed standard implementations of a web 2.0
>> application using different technologies will enable developers to compare
>> and contrast these technologies in a manner that does not exist today. By
>> providing excellent sample implementations of a concrete application that is
>> available to everyone, we will enable faster and easier application
>> development for users. Although we list three implementations in this
>> proposal, we encourage others to come up with many more using other language
>> stacks and/or frameworks e.g. Spring framework, Python etc.
>> Current Status
>> This is a new project with some sample not-ready-for-prime-time code.
>> Meritocracy
>> The initial developers are very familiar with meritocratic open source
>> development, both at Apache and elsewhere. Apache was chosen specifically
>> because the initial developers want to encourage this style of development
>> for the project.
>> Community
>> Olio seeks to create developer and user communities during incubation.
>> Core Developers
>> The initial core developers are Sun Microsystems, Inc. employees, and
>> faculty and students at UC Berkeley. We hope to expand this very quickly.
>> Alignment
>> The developers of the Olio want to work with the Apache Software
>> Foundation specifically because Apache has proven to provide a strong
>> foundation and set of practices for community-based development.
>> Known RisksOrphaned products
>> This project has a lot of enthusiasm among the core developers, has
>> ongoing development, and is not orphaned.
>> Inexperience with Open Source
>> The initial developers are well-versed in open source methodologies and
>> practices.
>> Homogenous Developers
>> The initial group of developers is from two organizations. We would like
>> to expand this and that is a primary reason for bringing this project to
>> Apache.
>> Reliance on Salaried Developers
>> Although part of the initial development team are students, the core
>> developers are employed by Sun Microsystems.
>> Relationships with Other Apache Products
>> None in particular, except that Apache HTTPD is the most common place to
>> run PHP, and which the initial PHP implementation uses.
>> A Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand
>> We believe in the processes, systems, and framework Apache has put in
>> place. The brand is nice, but is not why we wish to come to Apache.
>> DocumentationInitial Source
>> Sun Microsystems Inc. intends to donate code for their PHP implementation
>> of the sample events application as well as code to drive load against the
>> application. UC Berkeley intends to donate code for the Ruby on Rails
>> implementation.
>> This code is still a work in progress and will be provided primarily as a
>> starting place for a much more robust, community- developed implementation.
>> External DependenciesRequired Resources
>> Developer mailing lists<moin-email.png>
>> <moin-email.png> <moin-email.png>
>> <moin-email.png>
>> A subversion repository
>> A JIRA issue tracker
>> Initial Committers
>>        •
>> Akara Sucharitakul <<moin-email.png>> Shanti
>> Subramanyam <<moin-email.png>> Sheetal Patil
>> <<moin-email.png>> Binu John
>> <<moin-email.png>> Kim Lichong <<moin-email.png>
>>> William Sobel <<moin-email.png>
>>> Arthur Klepchukov <<moin-email.png>
>>> Craig Russell <<moin-email.png>>
>> SponsorsChampion
>>        •
>> Craig Russell <<moin-email.png>>
>> Nominated Mentors
>>        •
>> Craig Russell <<moin-email.png>> Henning
>> Schmiedehausen <<moin-email.png>> Matt Hogstrom
>> <<moin-email.png>> Rick Hillegas
>> <<moin-email.png>Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM>
>> Sponsoring Entity
>> The Apache Incubator.
>> Craig L Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
>> 408 276-5638
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message