On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 07/12/2012 10:26 PM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
>>
>> The way that we choose to divide and sub-divide our work
>> would seem subject to change, what is part of the current "Proton"
>> stream may not always be so in the future.
>
>
> I think this point gets to the heart of the matter.
>
> The proton initiative brings a change in emphasis. Where previously our
> focus was on AMQP compliant brokers and 'clients', proton is more explicit
> in its aim in being embeddable by other brokers and clients[1].
>
> As a community, while I think we are all supportive of that, we do not all
> have complete clarity as to where that change in emphasis may lead or what
> it means for users.
>
> I think this lack of clarity, consensus and certainty is entangled with the
> discussion on a separate list, but in fact exists whether or not there is a
> new list and whatever that list is called.
>

We should probably have a general discussion about what we want to do
as a project going forward.
While it's difficult to nail down a set strategy as a lot of pieces
are still evolving, an honest dialogue about what we would want "QPid"
to become is a good thing to have.

I felt that the opposition (or support) for the list was based on
various assumptions and demonstrates the lack of consensus and clarity
as a team. I agree 100% with Gordon's comments. The issue with the
mailing list is just a symptom of a more larger problem we have in the
project.

We need to ask ourselves what we want to achieve collectively as a
project, so our individual contributions on a daily basis reflects
that.
Or else we will all pull in different directions, which will only hurt
us long term.

Regards,

Rajith

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to