So far so good. And there was a recommendation to change the name. Do
you remember what happened next?
There was a claim that hornetq is just another suproject, like other
ActiveMQ subproject. Except that those are other language bindings,
complementary to the ActiveMQ (well, except Apollo). This is actually a
full blown project competing with ActiveMQ (some 6 months ago) and now
supposed to replace ActiveMQ once everybody gives up. I have never heard
of an open source project being replaced by another in a future version.
Now I have stop being a squeaky wheel. It's sad to notice that some
interests seem to be clouding common sense. Why didn't you guys admit a
few weeks back that it was a mistake? Actually, when did you realize it
was a mistake?
Hadrian
On 04/20/2015 08:54 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
I voted in favour of the code donation. I also voted for the activemq6 name
back then. The way it was presented back then, read the threads, was that
hornetq comes with jms 2.0 support, better threading model, we'll take
what's good there and incorporate it into activemq. The same all is peachy
message as the current board report.
A few months later, the first activemq 6 release, I personally wasn't that
interested in yet, still a long way from a production release. Then there
was -1 vote due to name clashes. I seconded that with a -1 of my own. And
then everything went haywire, right? I suggested a change of name, read the
threads, and then the reaction from the Winston/Fuse crowd, which I didn't
call evil nor conspiracy (although my understanding as of late is that
everything was planned in a corporation meeting rooms) was very violent. The
consequence was my recommendation to grow HornetQ in the right place for
that at the ASF.
Did you actually read the code or the changes made?
It was pretty clear from the beginning this was going to be a
sub-project and we would incorporate changes.. there was a new repo
open, a new JIRA open, new jiras fed... and 205 Pull requests with
about 400 committs in 4 months...
We incorporated OpenWire, changed how connection factories are
serialized and persisted to be exactly the same as what's done on
ActiveMQ5, the server start was recently changed to be exactly as
what's done on Apollo, Documentation was changed around a lot to be
consistent with Apache brands... etc.. etc.. etc...
Nothing different than what agreed was done...
Nothing was done behind meeting rooms I assure you.. in fact we were
just set to deliver what we agreed as part of the donation, while we
were clearing up the Cat-X dependencies and renames.
It was a mistake was to call it activemq-6.0.0.. as we knew we were
not ready.. it was just the first release..
That has been said a few times already, and you ignore these points.
