Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [json-rpc] New maintainer needed!

Expand Messages
  • Mikeal Rogers
    Wow, lot s of action. I have a few things; I do think google groups hosting is a bit dangerous for an open project. Google has shown itself to be very good
    Message 1 of 17 , Sep 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Wow, lot's of action.

      I have a few things;

      I do think google groups hosting is a bit dangerous for an open project. Google has shown itself to be very good about openness and is pretty good about the projects that it's hosting, but it's still a large company with it's own interests buried somewhere. That said, it's 12x better than yahoo groups, so it's still a huge step up.

      I have a debian server I use for hosting some other open source projects I do. Intel Core 2 Duo on more bandwidth that I know what to do with. The hosting is free and the bandwidth is free ( a friend of mine is the head network admin ). I can host trac, subversion, mailman, apache spash page, whatever is needed. 

      If anyone would like I can ask the Open Source Applications Foundation if they would host email ( they currently have a good mailman setup and host the IETF Calsify working group list among others ) and maybe some of the other services if everyone would feel better with a non-profit organization providing services rather than individuals or corporations.

      There is currently a hunk of code on json-rpc.org, and it's confusing to new comers whether json-rpc.org is a code project or a standards project. A standards project needs svn, wiki, mailing list, and a nice splash page with links to all known implementations. If a standards project happens to host a reference implementation that's fine, but the site should represent a standards based project upfront.

      +1 to a group of owners rather than a single one. 

      Since the standards work has become so stagnant I would suggest we adopt something like the IETF model for contribution and driving on the standard to move things forward. 

      I would suggest this community start building and maintaining a set of standard test cases that new implementors can use to check if they are standards compliant. This has seriously helped with the adoption of WebDAV and CalDAV.

      -Mikeal

      On Aug 23, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Weston Ruter wrote:

      Does anyone object to moving over to Google Groups? If not I can create a new Google Group for JSON-RPC tomorrow and we can begin discussing matters there. We can then make all of the JSON-RPC committee members Group managers/owners.

      I am interested in Jeffrey's idea about using Google Code Project Hosting to manage and archive JSON-RPC development. It would be an easy way to handle the wiki, issue tracking, and svn. If this idea is favorable, we could set up redirects from pages on json-rpc.org to the corresponding pages on the Google Code project site for JSON-RPC (pages such as version 1.0 of the spec). 

      The only two concerns I have about using Google Code is (1) our work on JSON-RPC isn't really a software project but a specification so at first it seems a little out-of-place (maybe), and (2) what about the domain name <json-rpc.org>? Would it be more beneficial to have a dedicated website to the development to JSON-RPC or is a Google Code project sufficient? 

      I've really enjoyed using Google Code for hosting my own projects, so I know it would be a good experience for us.

      Weston


    • pastrana@ultraflat.net
      ... Agreed, but mainly about files/svn etc.. I guess google is ok for hosting the mailing list, and might even be a good point regarding publicity , archives
      Message 2 of 17 , Sep 4, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        > it's still a large company with it's own interests buried somewhere.

        Agreed, but mainly about files/svn etc.. I guess google is ok for hosting
        the mailing list, and might even be a good point regarding 'publicity',
        archives etc. of the debate.

        > everyone would feel better with a non-profit organization
        > providing services rather than individuals or corporations.

        I think we need to find a non-profit organization to host the project's
        material (specs/wiki/files/polls/svn).

        Some sort of 'initiative endorsement' could help getting visibility &
        momentum but only once the specs are mature ...

        > Since the standards work has become so stagnant I would suggest we
        > adopt something like the IETF model for contribution and driving on
        > the standard to move things forward.

        IETF model might be overkill (I actually don't know the process) but we
        _do_ need some sort of project milestones / schedule and validation
        mechanism.

        > whether json-rpc.org is a code project or a standards project

        _standard project_ + conformance tests (+ reference 'pseudo' implementation
        ?)

        My 2 €cents

        LP
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.