+1. Before 2.0 is definitely the right time.
Hadrian
On Nov 6, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Yes, I agree, that before 2.0 would be good.
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Bruce Snyder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I think Camel has a good and diverse self sustaining community and
that it should aim to be a TLP now.
Being a subproject of ActiveMQ is no more relevant imho.
So I'd like to start writing a proposal that would be submitted to
the board.
We would have to come with a project charter, decide what the PMC
list
will be and find a PMC chair.
Help and feedback welcomed !
I have been pondering this for a while as well. I think it would be a
very good move for Camel since it's applicable to far more than just
ActiveMQ. One of the first questions I receive when I speak about
Camel is why it is a subproject of ActivMQ and my response is simply
that that's where the project began. I would definitely +1 such a
move, but the question is should we do it now or wait for the 2.0
release? I think such a move should take place before the 2.0
release.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!
G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
Apache Camel - http://activemq.org/camel/
Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
