>>As a matter of fact we have quite some committers in our >>community that are sponsored by the companies they are >>working for. Who is able to define whether who is the >>"leading" or "main" contributor? I would not want to risk >>picking the wrong one and pissing off other contributors. So >>either name them all or drop this classification. Terms like >>"main" or "leading" >>are a problem. >> > > > Again, anyone outside of the ASF is allowed to make any observations > they feel are warranted - regardless of ASF corporate policy. It might > fly in the face of what the ASF wants, but it doesn't make the statement > valid or invalid.
Sure > Whether the PRC agrees with "a leading", "the > leading", "a main", "the main", makes little difference. SD can say > what they say; the real issue is the relationship between the ASF and > JBoss. Well, I don't know much about the ASF and JBoss story. (And I think I also don't want to know ;) But for me it's simple and not about JBoss. If it was some ACME company - it would still not be ok. It's just something you don't say or do. And what we should only point the magazine to is the fact that we don't like it. ...what they do is up to them. But just keeping our mouths shut and only rail about the fact probably does not help the JBoss relationship at all. > People at the ASF are so "worked up" over JBoss in particular (and vice > versa). Every time someone outside of both ASF and JBoss just makes an > observation that JBoss is a leading contributor, we set up the PR > machine and launch off some emails, maybe a few people will go over to > the TSS forums and blow up at Jboss people, and I could expect a few > nasty blog rants from both sides. Well, if you write something like that you have to cope with criticism. But I would aim at the magazine - not JBoss. ...maybe that's the difference. > I just don't think it's constructive, > that's all. Believe me now or hear me later - there are good things to > be gained from calming this situation down a little. TBH ...I think writing a polite letter is constructive. And as a homework we should try to realize it's not JBoss who wrote that line. That should calm everyone down. ...at least it should cheers -- Torsten
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
