On Oct 23, 2007, at 6:43 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Noel,
<decloak>
I was there when it happened. It was actually the other way
around..Short story, the "independents" had trouble letting anyone
else work or suggest ideas which went against their own mental model
of how things should be. When i argued for a middle path vociferously,
they left.
</decloak>
-- dims
Dims,
I was simply trying to clear up a point of ambiguity with respect to
my (and by extension my employer's) involvement in Tuscany. I was
hoping to avoid digging up the past, which doesn't serve good purposes.
Were the independents completely intransigent or were the others
inflexible? Sometimes people just have different goals and
reconciliation doesn't work because things are too far apart. I and
the others working on the SCA Java implementation left the project
because there was constant friction and differences of opinion, and
we felt it best for the two camps to go their separate ways. I
previously explained my motivations here:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200703.mbox/%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unfortunately, I don't have much time to follow Tuscany closely
although I do check the lists occasionally. It does seem both it and
our community (Fabric3) have a lot less friction and are growing
nicely. Sometimes communities just diverge based on differences of
opinion, technical or otherwise, and trying to villainize one group
is the wrong approach since it is not constructive.
I wish Tuscany luck as I work closely with some of those involved in
the project on the SCA specifications and have a lot of technical and
personal respect for them.
Jim
On 10/23/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matthieu Riou wrote:
they did welcome enough independent committers while being in the
incubator
Attracting a large quantity of independent developers while being
in the incubator is pretty hard
Yes, but it seems to be emerging that there *were* more
independents, and
they have left to work actively elsewhere (as indicated by Jim
Marino for
BEA). Is this an indicator that the community wasn't able to
embrace the
interests of more than one vendor? Since SCA is a standard, why
was there a
need to fork the implementation?
--- Noel
P.S. I've removed [VOTE], since Ant indicates that the vote is
being tabled
for now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
