On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 8:12 AM Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Martyn, you continue to misrepresent things.
>
> When we say RH on this thread it's pretty clear what it means. It was
> said before, we prefer to use this term to refer to a group that does
> have an agenda. There are a few people who refuse to have conversations
> that ignore the elephant in the room.
>
> So, RH. I have nothing but respect for RedHat Software, Inc. I have
> friends over there, I know its culture, I was invited to some of its
> events, I *recommend* some of its products. Great company, friendly to
> open source, sponsor of the ASF.
>
> The RH clique in this thread refers to a group of people who, in my
> experience, are pushing an agenda.
Who’s that?
You claim that Artemis has fantastic
> technical merits. Fine. In the open source world, pay attention, value
> is given by adoption. Not by marketing materials, not by what managers
> say, *adoption*! ActiveMQ proved that, Camel did, Karaf did, CXF did.
> Heck, HTTPD did, Hadoop+Spark big data ecosystem, Maven, they all did,
> by getting adoption.
>
> HornetQ/Artemis has its chance, it's on equal footing. All this
> conversation points to a belief of the said clique that lives in an echo
> chamber that the *only* way to get adoption for Artemis is to steal the
> ActiveMQ name, buy replacing it. The only tool said clique has (and had)
> is overwhelming veto power in the PMC (Bruce mentioned it yesterday that
> technically the vote could pass, but he knows very well what would
> happen next). I asked you, and the -1s got reversed in an amusing way,
> if you want to grow Artemis inside or outside the ActiveMQ community. So
> you don't want to go TLP (I expected that) because like I was told in
> the past what you want is the ActiveMQ brand. And the more sad reason
> for that (I know outraged replies will follow), is that the issue is you
> promising something to your managers and thy bought into your ideas the
> hinge on stealing (basically) ActiveMQ. It's not RedHat Software, Inc's
> fault, it's all on you. And now you're in a bind. Even scarier is that
> the market, see AWS seems, to validate the value of ActiveMQ (the real
> one, 5.x).
>
> So, I dare you to prove me wrong, and prove the Artemis value by
> increasing adoption. Bonus points for doing it without abusing the
> ActiveMQ brand. Or you can try abusing of your voting power. But you'd
> gain more respect from building technology of undeniable value, like
> many of the ASF projects.
>
> Hadrian
>
>
>
> On 12/07/2017 06:26 AM, Martyn Taylor wrote:
> > To be quite frank, I'm offended by some of the accusations made in this
> > thread.
> >
> > After the last round of accusations of Red Hat are pushing through their
> > own agenda, I'm sad to see it happening again. I continue to use my Red
> > Hat email address in public discussions, in my PR requests and review.
> > I've nothing to hide nor am I ashamed to be employed by a company like
> Red
> > Hat. My legions lie with ActiveMQ and making the project and community a
> > better place. I've put so much personal and emotional effort into this
> > project. To have my votes and opinions abrogated just because I work
> for a
> > certain company I find shocking and not at all democratic.
> >
> > Actually, looking back through this vote thread to the people who voted
> +1,
> > who were accused of pushing an alternate agenda are actually the same
> > people who I see involved in the community on a day to day basis. The
> same
> > people fixing bugs, answering user questions and doing releases. And
> > they're not all employed by the same company.
> >
> > If people want to vote -1 to this, fair enough you're entitled to your
> vote
> > and I have no issue. But, all this talk about companies pushing an
> agenda,
> > seems to me to be a bit of a guise to detract away from the actual
> subject
> > in hand. TBH, I am sick of hearing about it.
> >
> > I respect the result of the vote.
> >
> > I am -1 on the idea of making Artemis TLP.
> > I am +1 on Bruce's suggestion on creating a Roadmap. I think this is
> > really what we need right now.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Michael André Pearce <
> > michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On the website front I’m happy to stick my hand up, giving it an
> overhaul
> >> and design inline with the new logo.
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On 6 Dec 2017, at 22:57, Bruce Snyder <bruce.sny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I agree that the website needs an overhaul and I'm interested to take
> on
> >>> this task. I also agree that Artemis should somehow be made more
> >> prominent
> >>> on the website, but how to do this is more debatable. I will start a
> >>> separate discussion around this.
> >>>
> >>> More discussions on the dev list is *always* a good thing.
> >>>
> >>> Bruce
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Clebert Suconic <
> >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Ok... so, consider this a CANCEL on this vote...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think we have things settled.. and some positive factors from this
> >>>> thread:
> >>>>
> >>>> - All agreed to make Artemis more prominent on the website.
> >>>> - Refactor the website... like.. now... with Artemis being brought
> >>>> forward.. (the website needs a facelift regardless)
> >>>> ... any volunteers here?
> >>>> ... we will need a discuss here... Honestly I don't like the
> confluent
> >>>> wiki.
> >>>> - Have more discussions on the dev list
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> perl -e 'print
> >>> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
> >>>
> >>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> >>> Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/>
> >>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
> >>
> >
>
--
*Christian Posta*
twitter: @christianposta
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
http://fabric8.io
