For what it's worth, I agree with Hadrian that HornetQ should go to the incubator. The fact that I gave up on pushing the issue doesn't mean I don't think that's the right course of action. It just didn't seem like it was going to happen.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 6:46 PM Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: > Uhm, what were we doing for the past 2 weeks? On two lists, multiple > threads? > > I assume you are aware of my recommendation to have hornetq grow > independently in the incubator. That proposal was rejected, but no > reason given besides that the RH engineers would have to do the work > twice. My request was to include that in the report (or whatever other > reason might exist). The way it looks is that Fuse/RH/(the Damarillo > group), anyway you want to describe that faction is dead set on > replacing the existing ActiveMQ with HornetQ (or whatever code name) in > version 6 or 10. By keeping HornetQ under the ActiveMQ PMC influence its > future will be heavily influenced by the already biased PMC and at the > same time hide the lack of diversity in HornetQ. In the incubator, > HornetQ will have the opportunity and freedom to grow in any direction > and build a diverse community. > > Since there is all this concern about the viral nature of the plan, why > not allow HornetQ to take its course, build more diversity in the > ActiveMQ community (actually both) and influence it based on technical > merits instead of abundance of votes? > > Does that clarify my request? > Hadrian > > > On 04/20/2015 05:51 PM, Bruce Snyder wrote: > > Agreed, we need to get this report published/submitted, so time is off > the > > essence here. > > > > Hadrian, you have raised some points that you would like to have included > > in the report, but nobody can read your mind. Please add your points to > the > > report so that others can see them and discuss them ASAP. > > > > Bruce > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Hiram Chirino <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> So we are running into a time crunch here. I'm hoping all the PMC > >> members will pitch in and apply any edits to the report they deem > >> necessary. Many thanks to those who have helped out. Seems like some > >> folks are still now happy with it, so that's why have held off in > >> sending it so that they get a chance to add their input. But your > >> right, I do have to send this in before the 22nd so really today is > >> the last day I can hold off so that I can send it on the 21st so that > >> the board has at least 24 hours to review before their meeting. > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> One more thing. It's the responsibility of the PMC chair to provide a > >> timely > >>> report to the board. It's entirely his choice how he wants to go about > >> it, > >>> what he decides to include and what to leave out. The report should be > >>> published in a timely manner though, so that comments (usually from the > >>> board) could be addressed before the meeting. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Hadrian > >>> > >>> > >>> On 04/20/2015 05:23 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Ok so, then it sounds like your ok with the report the way it is right > >>>> now. > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I have nothing to write. There were some claims made that were not > >>>>> substantiate. My request was for the party that made the claims to > >>>>> provide > >>>>> an explanation. > >>>>> > >>>>> I cannot explain somebody else's point of view. I can explain my > views > >> if > >>>>> anybody requires it. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> Hadrian > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 04/20/2015 02:39 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hadrian, please write up what you want to include in the board > report > >>>>>> that way the rest of the PMC can review. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea < > [email protected]> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> First, the report is late. Second, I don't think it addresses the > >>>>>>> problems. > >>>>>>> Third, I made a request to please include in the report an > >> explanation > >>>>>>> about > >>>>>>> why hornetq moving to the incubator is a non-starter for Fuse > crowd. > >> It > >>>>>>> is > >>>>>>> very frustrating that requests get ignored. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hadrian > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 04/20/2015 02:16 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Are they any other updates folks want to make to this report? > >> Please > >>>>>>>> apply your updates soon. The board meets on the 22nd and I'd like > >> to > >>>>>>>> submit the report on the 21st at the latest. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Hiram Chirino > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi guys. The board requested a report this month and had some > >>>>>>>>> specific questions around the hornetq code donation. I've put > up a > >>>>>>>>> first cut a report on the Wiki at: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=55155578 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hopefully we can finish off the code donation naming vote soon a > >>>>>>>>> report that too. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > >>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > >>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Hiram Chirino > >> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > >> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > >> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > >> > > > > > > >
