Re: POI TLP -- constructively

Andy-- good thoughts. A very pragmatic look at the situation.
Defuses the debate and provides practical suggestions for moving
forward.

By the way, as a POI user, I wouldn't worry too much about POI being
doomed due to Microsoft's switch in formats. It's going to take years
for developers to be able to assume everyone has Office 2007? 2008?
on their desks.

WILL

On 12/18/06, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> I really liked hearing Avik speak up because he's been hurting for
> awhile and not spoken up. It was Nick's first release, cut him some
> slack. POI has been around since 2001, in Apache since 2002. It is
> nearly 2007. Talks of mentoring us or incubating us are a little
> patronizing and insulting (multiple of us our even members of the
> foundation though I forget who). Much of the thread is about bashing us
> and bashing me in particular which I stupidly reacted to partly out of
> fatigue. I appologize for that, I've been very busy launching
> http://buni.org and planning our corporate structure.
>
> It is fair to say that not many POI people participate in Jakarta.
> However, to add perspective we never joined the "Jakarta as it is" -- we
> joined Jakarta as it was...and one day this formed around us. It is
> fair to criticize our build...it is pretty rusty and yucky. I do
> however thing focusing too much on it is a bit well...mean. Nick has
> been doing a great job and a lot of work. (I on the other hand will
> have to merge my patches into SVN before I can even commit them since
> they're off of CVS :-P ). However it was his first release. Moreover,
> Apache's "release policies" have evolved considerably since the last
> official release and none of us have a valid signed key...that needs to
> be rectified (laziness, don't like conventions where all the cool key
> signing parties). We're not the only one's guilty of kinds of neglect.
> Our own Marc Johnson (who cofounded the project) has been extremely
> frustrated at the lack of responsiveness in getting his access/etc in
> order and no one at POI seems to be able to jerk the right chain in
> Apache to make that happen (and I think he requested from this PMC with
> no effect). So much that he's given up!
>
> In any case, legal issues aside (which have to a good degree abated, but
> take yourself back 5 years) I really don't want POI to really merge into
> Jakarta (which is really now the successor to Jakarta Commons) and I
> don't think the majority of the committers do either. On the other
> hand, I really don't think POI by itself can be a TLP as its scope is
> too narrow (historically this was deliberate). I also don't think that
> parts of POI have much of a future as we're moving to an XML formats
> era, but other parts certainly do. Partly because of projects like POI,
> Microsoft is even moving. Once the default is to save in an XML format
> then will anyone really care about POI "as it is" as more than a
> migration tool.
>
> That being said, there is considerable interest in unified APIs for each
> of these verticals (spreadsheets, documents, etc) and considerable life
> in POI with a very active userbase. Many people dealing with data
> formats have asked for common APIs for the various verticals that output
> to the various formats. Moreover, many of us are no longer as single
> minded with regards to Java as we once were (POI ruby for example). And
> achieving API compatibility across these could be interesting.
>
> I therefore propose this:
>
> * Jakarta PMC has the responsibility to not call more votes on
> restructuring POI during the next X months. (Access or otherwise)
>
> * POI committers have responsibility for achieving the proper oversight
> procedures and putting out a new release in the next X months
>
> * POI committers have responsibility for putting together a TLP proposal
> and working out a consensus.
>
> (BTW that pretty much is batting 1000 on this:
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaPMCRequestTLPBenchmark )
>
> Full disclosure:
>
> I've also submitted a counter proposal to the committers as an
> alternative to leave apache entirely. However thus far most folks seem
> to value POIs association with Apache and the opportunities afforded
> them, even if they find it "difficult to work with" as one person stated
> in response. I suspect TLP status would alleviate some of the mutual
> snags between apache and POI (for one we could get poor Marc his access
> back despite him having sent in his CLA now like 3 times including when
> the project moved to Apache and for two we'd be sending our reports in
> ourselves and thus have to do more proper oversight).
>
> However, PPPPPLLLLLLEEEEEEAAAAAASSSSSSEEEE let's press the PAUSE button
> until January 3rd so that we can all get very drunk and open presents
> rather than jerk each other's chains in front of a computer on a mailing
> list.
>
> -Andy
> ----
> Andrew C. Oliver
> Buni Luni
> http://buni.org
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>


--
Forio Business Simulations

Will Glass-Husain
wglass@forio.com
www.forio.com