2017-01-18 13:53 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler <cziege...@apache.org>: > Guillaume Nodet wrote > > > > Again, I'm talking about using Apache to develop the will-be reference > > implementation of the being-designed spec. When the rfc is undergoing > > changes, the RI, as you say, is an experimental project to make sure the > > RFC properly address all problems and can be turned into a spec. The > > information needed to get involved in such a moving target is not > available > > to the Apache community. Again, I've no problem if someone wants to > > develop an implementation of a publicly available spec, but that's not > what > > I'm discussing here. > > > > And I don't think the OSGi Alliance want to have an open participation > into > > the spec design process, and that's perfectly fine with me. If I'm > wrong, > > then using public mailing lists and avoiding phone calls and f2f meetings > > is the way to go, such as we do at the ASF. > > > We should not get into a discussion here how the OSGi Alliance should > work.
We definitely have to discuss how the way the OSGi Alliance operates affects the ASF projects. I haven't advocated any change on the OSGi Alliance, that's definitely not our business. > > The other option we have is that we don't do any implementation of an > RFC here at Apache and wait for the final spec. The problem is not the fact that it's an RFC or a draft. The problem is the fact that the implementation is the input for changes into the spec. If the implementation only follows public changes, that would be fine. > Whoever is doing the RI > does it somewhere else and might do a code contribution or not. Yes, that definitely would avoid the problem. And I don't think it changes anything from the contributor point of view : the reason is that it's not really developed openly, as I explained, so there's definitely no difference with donating the code once the spec has been released. > Not sure > if that is the preferable way. We might end up with not having an > implementation at Apache at all. > The ASF does not care if there is one, multiple or no implementation at Apache at all afaik. However, it cares about the way the community work and that it operates as a meritocracy, which definitely rules out the fact not all members have access to the same information. > > Regards > > Carsten > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > Adobe Research Switzerland > cziege...@apache.org > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Red Hat, Open Source Integration Email: gno...@redhat.com Web: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
