-1. I'm not even going to add weight to this discussion by giving a reason. I find the thread a ridiculous reaction to the vote email, in it there are more inaccurate claims of the opinions of members of the community.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Gary Tully <gary.tu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't agree with the premise of this discussion at all. It seems to be > born out of a your replies to your self in an echo chamber. > > What are the adverse consequences in providing a robust migration path for > 5.x users to activemq 6 *within* the ActiveMQ project? > > The preceding vote did not have an implicit "now" in the title, it was > future focused. > In hind sight the title could have been: > > "When it's ready, Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6" > > I think there is consensus forming around that. > > On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 at 02:05 Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and > > hard-core Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny > > and they believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have > > it's own awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start > > a vote to graduate as TLP. > > > > Thoughts? > > Hadrian > > > > > > >
