Ignore this. I just realized something is wrong /w my mail sever. Not getting all my mail delivered to me.. humm...
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com> wrote: > Wow... I expect someone to chime in. > > Does this mean everyone agrees that hawtio needs to be treated like > every other 3rd party library we redistribute? > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com> wrote: >> Starting up a new thread to avoid hijacking the original POLL thread. >> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Without the hawt.io community donating the relevant ActiveMQ portions to the >>> ASF we will not be able to get a consensus around proposal #3. Thus, that >>> needs to be taken off the table. >> >> I think that's a faulty assumption that needs to get discussed and addressed. >> >> Any hawtio UI that we package in the ActiveMQ will be reviewed by the >> PMC. Like any 3rd party library that we ship, it has to have an >> approved license and it's functionality has to be tested and verified >> by the ActiveMQ project. If we the PMC does not like some detail of >> hawtio we just need to open issues to address them and once it's to >> the PMC's liking we can then package it. This is no different from >> any other 3rd party lib we use so why are we treating it differently? >> >> -- >> Hiram Chirino > > > > -- > Hiram Chirino > > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo -- Hiram Chirino Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo
