Thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts. It seems we've reached an consensus. I'm going to start a formal vote thread and please cast your vote there.
Thanks, Manu On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:22 PM Karol Brejna <[email protected]> wrote: > Manu, > > Thanks for bringing this difficult topic. > > I was struggling with it myself. > > Here are my thoughts: > > Our main objectives were to build the community and gain more adoption. > > Although there was some considerable interest, I think we were not able to > build a stable and sizable community around our project. > > We have identified some "technical" goals to achieve as the next steps. > Without a broader community, I think we won't be able to keep a decent > development activity and release pace. > > It doesn't look that the situation (community) would change any time soon, > so - with a heavy heart - I must agree that it would be only fair to the > Apache community to retire Gearpump. > > I am hoping we'll continue working on Gearpump in some other "formula" in > the future, as it has some strengths and is cool to use and develop ;-) > > Regards, > Karol > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 9:38 AM Manu Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Gearpump has been an Apache incubator since 2016-03-08. Thank you all for > > help to incubate Gearpump and keep it move forward. > > > > The activity around Gearpump has, however, slowed down and the last > release > > was more than one year ago. There is no sign of a growing community, > which > > is a requirement to be a Apache TLP. The long period of release process > has > > made things even harder for such a slim community. > > > > I don't see a future for Gearpump within Apache so it's better off to > > leave. > > > > What do you think ? > > > > Thanks, > > Manu Zhang > > >
