On 12/1/05, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11/30/05, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am very much against taking ASF content off-site, as it were. We have > a > > perfectly good wiki, and that's where our content should be. I know > there > > are a bunch of Confluence fans out there, and maybe it's a better > product in > > some ways. But the ASF has standardised on a wiki, and we shouldabide by > > that. (Was anyone hosting ASF code on an SVN server outside the > foundation, > > before we moved to CVS, just because it was better? I don't think so.) > > The ASF doesn't "standardize" on this type of tool. Them that do the > work make the decisions. What tools a community uses and how we use > them is up to the individual PMCs. What the ASF cares about is whether > the project's development community uses the tools to collaborate. > > Point in fact, the only reason we have a JIRA instance now is because > some projects started using their own instance off site. Because > projects were voting with their feet, we were able to find volunteers > to setup the JIRA instance. Now, people didn't push for our own JIRA > instance because it was "wrong" to have an issue tracker elsewhere, we > pushed for it because if some projects wanted to use JIRA, then it > follows that others would want to use it too. Looking at our JIRA > instance now, I'm thinking that was a good call :)
I'm not so sure. Much as I like JIRA, the ASF JIRA installation is vulnerable. It is effectively supported only by Jeff Turner, who works for Atlassian. We are dependent on him - and the fact that he works for Atlassian - for fixes, maintenance, and enhancements to JIRA itself. If he disappears, we are in trouble. The same concern has been expressed about adding a Confluence installation at the ASF. For security and legal reasons, the ASF has decided that the > foundation must have all of our *source code* in our repository on our > machines, and the ASF does want us to retain essential services, like > the mailing lists and primary web site, on ASF hardware. But secondary > services, like issue trackers and wikis, can be kept anywhere a > project finds convenient. If you ask on infra@, I don't think you'll get agreement with that last statement. -- Martin Cooper When security and legal issues do not trump, what works for the > volunteers, works for the ASF. Volunteers are the only ASF resource > that matters. > > If the WebWorks merger goes through, another aspect will be "eating > our own dog food". JIRA, Confluence, and Jive all use WebWork, and the > ASF *does* prefer that we use our own software when we can. If WebWork > is going to be our software, then, all things remaining equal, we > should give first preference to WebWork products. > > Of course, personally, I don't believe all things are equal. By > comparison, I find moin-moin painful to use. Being only human, I will > contribute fewer hours to working on a moin-moin wiki then I will a > Confluence wiki. I'm in the web application business, and I enjoy > using well-designed web applications, like JIRA, Confluence, and Jive. > Like most volunteers, I prefer to "volunteer with pleasure". > > -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
