+1 to adding links to 3rd party products in the Tools section (maybe with one sentence short description) +1 to the grace period till end of June
The mission and policies (written or not) of the ASF are certainly clear to some PMC members. One great mind added this FAQ entry [1] on May 10, 2007, before the camel-1.0.0 release which hasn't been modified since! We don't need to add links to 3rd party products/services all over the camel site to get the message across. Interested people will find the references on the Camel site (especially if there's one designated place for such references) and do their homework. All the relevant information, including the relationship to the Apache Camel should be on the 3rd party site. On the Apache Camel site, statements must be factual. On the 3rd party site, not our problem. To be clear, there are at least three companies now offering support for Apache Camel, or having products based on Camel. That's a great thing and a sign that the community is doing really good. I personally want that number to grow and all companies involved to be successful and continue to cooperate for the benefit of the project. The changes and cleanup of the wiki should be done in that spirit. Another thing that should be clear is that the ASF does not recognize companies/organizations as contributors to a project, only individuals. One clarification (I think Rob meant the same thing, but if not we can clarify it): 1. Support - can contain links to 3rd party products/services 2. Articles - can contain links to 3rd party articles/blogs (however if a company publishes a blog, we shouldn't add a link to every post about Camel) 3. Tutorials - same as articles 4. Tools - can contain links to 3rd party products. We could add a FAQ entry about our policy to using backlinks in the Camel site. One more clarification. There was no policy shaped off list, only friendly notifications when lines were crossed. I sometimes need to clarify ASF policies, rules, expectation and prefer to do it offline, especially when I believe the issue is understood by most others and there is no need to put people on the spot. From my experience this works better. Hadrian [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CAMEL/Can+I+get+commercial+support On May 4, 2011, at 3:21 AM, Rob Davies wrote: > I've corresponded with Hadrian about this off list. > > Whilst I understand the sentiment, this policy certainly wasn't clear to me > or other PMC members. Whilst there are occasional links to external > information, mainly at FuseSource, these are historical and done in the > context of providing information to new users and developers whilst we > growing the Camel community, to be one of the most successful and widely used > projects at Apache today. This isn't unique to Apache Camel, its a > methodology we've successfully followed whilst initiating and growing > ActiveMQ, ServiceMix, Karaf and CXF - to get as much information into users > hands as early as possible, from whatever source that maybe. > Given where Camel is today, its absolutely right to have a level playing > ground - but what I would like to see is that this policy is clearly > understood by everyone - and not handled in off list conversations. > > I would like to propose that from now on all links to 3rd party distributions > or usages of Apache Camel in a 3rd party product are put into (but not > limited to) the following 4 categories: > > 1. support > 2. Articles > 3. Tutorials > 4. Tools > > And there is a grace period (till end of June 2011) to move links to > external information to one of these areas by the authors, else it they will > be deleted. > > Here's my +1 > > On 3 May 2011, at 16:52, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote: > >> No, there are things that are not up to the community to decide. I drew >> attention when some changes were made that that was a mistake and my >> impression was that the point was well taken. I also mentioned that if >> changes won't be removed by their authors I will. That was months ago. If >> anything, I can be blamed for not making these changes earlier. >> >> The Apache Camel project has a designated place to inform the users >> community of commercial offerings [1]. And there are also the articles [2] >> and tutorials [3] pages that can be used (within reason). Everything else a >> commercial organization has to say about offerings related to the Apache >> projects can be done on their site. >> >> I hope this clarifies it, >> Hadrian >> >> >> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CAMEL/Support >> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CAMEL/Articles >> [3] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CAMEL/Tutorials >> >> >> >> On May 3, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> This post is addressed to Hadrian who has been deleting and editing >>> web pages from Apache Camel (today), >>> which seems to be related to the fact those pages had information about >>> Fuse. >>> >>> I would like to call out that such actions should have been discussed >>> in the public at first and agreed upon by the community. >>> >>> Most of the information has been there for a long time and its related >>> and relevant for Apache Camel. >>> And of use for people who look into what Camel is. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Claus Ibsen >>> ----------------- >>> FuseSource >>> Email: cib...@fusesource.com >>> Web: http://fusesource.com >>> CamelOne 2011: http://fusesource.com/camelone2011/ >>> Twitter: davsclaus >>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ >>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/ >> >
