I would give this a bit more time, maybe after apachecon. While Willem
stated that it's easy to move code back and forth, his statement is not
correct. It would be if there were no external contributors, otherwise
you have ip issues (which is different than the way it's licensed).
I think a marketplace is a good idea, but personally I will not spend
time on the scala ecosystem. It's not clear to me if we all understand
the solution you propose the same way. I am not even sure if we all
understand/agree on the problem the same way.
My $0.02,
Hadrian
On 02/22/2013 09:55 AM, Henryk Konsek wrote:
+1 I like this proposal.
I'll create the GitHub organization called 'camel-marketplace'. Then
I'll create 'camel-scala' and 'camel-scala-extra' projects under its
umbrella. If anybody of you want to be added as an administrator to
the 'camel-marketplace' organization, please just drop me a line.
All the contributions to the 'camel-scala' will be released under
Apache license. Contributions under incompatible licenses will be
committed to 'camel-scala-extra'.
After I create the projects together with some nice homepages for
them, I'll add appropriate references to the Camel Contributing [1]
and Camel Components [1] pages. From this point forward we could refer
to these projects as to the official home for the Camel components
written in Scala.
The versioning and the life cycle of Scala communities will be
synchronized with ASF Camel release the same way as Camel Extra is.
What do you think?
[1] http://camel.apache.org/contributing.html
[2] http://camel.apache.org/components.html
--
Henryk Konsek
http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
