I didn’t mean to be negative or emotional.. sorry it’s being a hard day for me… all I want to clarify is if we would need 100% consensus in the future
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:34 PM, jgenender <jgenen...@apache.org> wrote: > clebertsuconic wrote >>> Lets make this project work in harmony for everyone so we can work >>> towards >>> consensus for what is AMQ6 and when. >> >> Harmony and Unanimous consensus is something pretty rare in humanity. > > Thats a pretty sad view. Nobody said unanimous. Harmony is certainly not > that hard. But where I think the elephant is where those votes are aligned. > That should be a much bigger concern. > > > clebertsuconic wrote >> If you help promote Artemis, work towards the roadmap.. and >> everything.. there's still the question: >> >> >> 1 year, 2 years, 3 years from now... aren't we going to be back to this >> square? >> >> >> I just want to know the terms ahead of time.. is this fixable? I >> believe one year from now.. we will -1s from usually -1s people, no >> matter how complete we are on the Roadmap. > > Who can answer that? I think minimally it needs to be easily migrated. At > this stage it certainly cannot... at least not from my experience. We > cannot turn our back on the majority of this community who just so happens > to use ActiveMQ 5. > > Its also kind of sad that you have relinquished to thinking -1s are -1s > forever. I believe I told you point blank I'm all for Artemis being AMQ6... > "When its ready". What is ready? It was stated many times in this thread. > I believe the -1s in this thread all said the same thing. Get more people > using it and have a good compatible migration path so we can be consistent > with all of our major version releases. > > Artemis is getting what it wants. More prominence and support from the AMQ > project and a commitment to migration path. > > > > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html -- Clebert Suconic
