On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 02:51:37AM +0200, Stephen McConnell wrote:
OK - given the qualification of intent based on the posts to this thread it seems to me that the PMC is being presented with a choice:
1. Move Fortress/ECM to Codehaus 2. Keep it here at Apache
You didn't break this one down into:
2a. Keep it here at Apache Avalon 2b. Keep it at Apache, but as part of another project
I think the outcomes of those two sub-options are very different, and need to be examined independently (rather than as one hunk in your response).
Before writing our proposal, we did consider option 2b in detail (and 2a, and many others). As a group, we had mixed feelings on what the direction should be, but the direction indicated in our letter in the end received consensus.
As for the background rationale, I can only speak for myself there. I'll try to be both direct and respectful here, but this is a difficult topic that has to do with ideals, opinions, and personality, so please "add some salt" if you need to. Once again, this is just me talking, and certainly not the whole "BOP", even though some of what I say may resonate with the feelings of some BOPpers.
Avalon has been "somewhat" of a controversial project here at the ASF. I really don't feel like bringing up old memories on the many, many months of controversy and discussion (or spend more months discussing those things). Our mutual goal is to put all that behind us once and for all. Avalon needs to survive as a healthy ASF project. Moreover, the ASF needs to take steps to ensure not only Avalon, but the range of wider projects related to Avalon prosper too.
I fear that, by letting Fortress and ECM stay at the ASF, we will be less successful at achieving those things.
Let me give an example. Someone will say "hey, I've got this cool new IoC-aware microkernel idea. Can we put it in jakarta-commons?". There will be some flurry of enthusiasm, and the person will more often than not be gently directed to one of the half-dozen java-based framework projects we have. What if that person and his friends choose to bring all their enthusiasm and energy to a new fortress top-level-project? What if they expect to be able to change Avalon-Framework, and find that some of the developers of that framework are not even on speaking terms with some of the fortress people? What if discussion ensues that "merlin should be more like fortress because this feature X just sucks"?
You see a lot of "what-if"s there. Those are always difficult. The appropriate and natural answer to questions like that is "we're a happy bunch of people here and we can resolve things like that in a respectful, productive and mutually satisfactory way". There is supposed to be this positive feedback loop between people and projects in open source that is a whole lot of fun to be a part of. Over the course of approximately the last two years, I've slowly been convinced that this does not apply to avalon, at least not to me and avalon.
There is, community-wise, a complex legacy here. Keeping this codebase at the ASF as a new project will keep around that legacy, and I personally dread all the communication overhead ("when the shit hits the fan", "with my asbesto suit on") that I know I will put in from the feeling of responsibility towards the ASF to make such a new project a success. I have run around with similar negative feelings for the better part of two years (those people around here that know me a little will know I have a "thin skin"), to the point of desparation.
I have tried this path path (option 2 and its permutations) a few times too often, and as much as it saddens me, it really no longer is an option for me personally, sorry.
I will point out again that there are several BOP people who do not share these feelings, and are amendable to the idea of avalon splitting up into multiple projects. By all means, consider the option.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Also note that moving the code to Codehaus means that it cannot use the org.apache namespace. Forking the code is fine, but non-ASF code cannot use our namespace
Can you explain why not?
(or more precisely, it *can* since we certainly can't control it, but we'd be extremely and vocally peeved about it :-).
Why would anyone be peeved?
When it comes to java software, this comes down to saying "no non-ASF project is allowed to be binary compatible with an ASF project or at least we'd "be extremely and vocally peeved about it".
Perhaps an analogy will work. For example, consider forking Apache HTTPD. To make my forked webserver a viable replacement, it had better come with a configuration file named
/etc/apache/conf/httpd.conf
and the command
apachectl graceful
had better work.
This example, is, of course, not completely fictional. Apache-SSL has peacefully (as far as I know, at least?) existed side by side with Apache-HTTPD for years now, and even uses the apache name (obviously) and marks (the feather). Why is there no issue there, but an issue here?
We're not asking for anything like that. We explicitly do not want to use the apache name or the avalon name for anything else than providing binary compatibility. I can't see how this makes anyone extremely peeved.
Another analogy closer to home might be the javax.* namespace. The ASF distributes and is allowed to distribute several packages in the javax namespace, even with java being a trademark of Sun that it needs to aggressively protect. I'll assume that at least part of the reason to allow this is to allow the ASF to provide binary compatibility with sun-provided packages. And I'll assert that making this allowance is in the best interests of Sun.
I understand that Avalon and the ASF need to protect their name and interests. But I sincerely believe that, in this case, our proposal is in the best interests of avalon and the wider apache community.
Finally, rest assured that we will not use the org.apache namespace if the ASF really does not wish it. We're not trying to get anyone all vocally peeved about anything.
-- cheers,
- Leo Simons
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/ Component Community -- http://componentplanet.org/ Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but people wouldn't obey the rules." -- Alan Bennett
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
