Hadrian, +1, and very well said. I had a response ready to go, but you summed up the most parts. I will fill in a few holes...
Martyn (and Chris I guess) I am asking that you please put down your pitchforks. The history of the players, not the employer per se, but the small subset has caused quite a stir on this project and others that causes serious mistrust on agendas. Unfortunately you guys are somewhat collateral damage and have likely not taken the time to look at the history in the mail lists (and for those of you who are on private@) the knock down drag out, bellicose, passive-aggressive attacks that come from this small contingent of people who preceded you. I won't call people out because this thread has gotten way to personal already and that will not do anyone any good. I'll leave it to you to research for itself and perhaps it will shed some light on what Hadrian has just stated, while it will show why there is mistrust. Martyn and Chris, calling out a "what have you contributed" isn't cool. Everyone is here because they contributed and have some form of blood, sweat, and tears in this project. Clamoring around and saying you are better because you did a CVE or whatever, is hidden words for "I get paid to work on open source... you don't so I can make the decisions and you have no right". Thats offensive. Because guess what? Once Bruce, me, Hadrian, Arthur, and many others DID get paid to work on ActiveMQ and we DO care about this project, even when we weren't paid. I cant contribute 1/1000th the volume you guys do anymore because I don't get paid to do it. But I surely care about this project, its community, and its future because I paid my dues, just like you are doing today. I mean with your argument, maybe a contingent of the people who sit on the Apache Board should just resign because they provide oversight and don't contribute swathes of code anymore? That said, the above is neither here nor there for the sake of this conversation and it doesn't matter. Its there to provide a bit of history and hopefully hint to you guys on some of the arguments you are making that really have no bearing on this vote. Its just to provide some history. The decisions made so far in this thread were nothing against Artemis, Red Hat, etc. It was project folks stating to get Artemis on track for migration so it CAN become ActiveMQ 6 and be adopted. People here want Artemis to EARN its community. I am sure you do! Don't you want Artemis to stand on its own 2 feet and have a community based on its own merits? You have 100% support for that here, yes even the -1 people. AFAICT, we reached consensus. Migration path and getting more prominence of Artemis on the main AMQ website. Lets move forward in a positive direction and stop the personal attacks and sour grapes. Everyone here wants to see Artemis succeed. So lets do this. -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
