I personally think that the incubator is one of the worst places to
build a project/community. Apache has recognized this.. that's why
there's Apache Labs. The incubator works when you have an existing
project and are working towards transitioning it to a full fledged
project.
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Bruce Snyder <bruce.sny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Robert Godfrey <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 10 June 2010 19:18, Bruce Snyder <bruce.sny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Marnie McCormack
>>> <marnie.mccorm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Bruce,
>>>> Sounds a really interesting idea, and potentially a good combination of
>>>> product/knowledge and people for a core AMQP 1.0 implementation.
>>>>
>>>> Can I ask why not use the ASF as we do for contribution to the
>>>> Qpid/ActiveMQ
>>>> code base now, is there a reason why people won't want to contribute the
>>>> code to the ASF ?
>>>>
>>>> If we're not using the ASF, then it'd be best to agree the license that the
>>>> code'll be under right from the start I think ?
>>>
>>> Since the ASF doesn't provide infrastructure yet for generic project
>>> hosting, we would need to host the project either under the ActiveMQ
>>> project or the Qpid project and that's not really appropriate for
>>> something that is meant to be completely separate from those two.
>>> Also, we want to encourage non-ASF folks to participate more easily.
>>> This is what lead Rafi and I just loosely agree that Github would be
>>> more appropriate (especially git makes it so easy to contribute and
>>> fork). But the lack of a project mailing list is one problem with
>>> Github. But as Hiram pointed out in his reply, perhaps Github + Google
>>> Groups = the correct combination.
>>
>> Yeah - I'm very happy with that combination - and agree that is
>> probably the best approach
>>
>> If, down the road, we think it should become an Apache Project (via
>> the incubator) we can go down that road...
>>
>> Obviously in that case we'd want to keep track of contributors as well
>> as using the ASL
>
> OK, so the two options for creating the project that are currently on
> the table are:
>
> 1) Github + Google Groups
>
> 2) Apache Incubator
>
> My initial bias would be toward #1 simply because I prefer git over
> svn. But as I think about, we should not overlook the Incubator.
>
> <devil's-advocate>
> If we intend to eventually bring the project back to the ASF, why not
> just start a new project in the Incubator now? We can put together a
> proposal that includes all the folks who want to be involved and just
> be very inclusive about voting in new folks. After all, it's really up
> to the project PMC about how high we set the bar for committership and
> PMC membership. The PMC runs the project using the Apache Way and is
> as inclusive as it wants to be.
> </devil's-advocate>
>
> As I type out my thoughts on this, I am liking this option more and
> more. But my observations of the Incubator over the last several years
> are definitely clouded by the problems it has had.
>
> Thoughts, opinions?
>
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print
> unpack("u30","D0G)u8...@4vyy9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
>
> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
>
>
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
