I'm not sure I'm against this idea entirely... Just who is going to pay for it? VA has massive hardware behind Sourceforge (and its still down all the damn time). How do you do Apacheforge on far less boxen without whats left of VC money and probably an IPO?
All of the other issues are little details that could be worked out. I think this is a show stopper, sorry Paul. https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=754&group_id=1 Its not awe inspiring (this doc seems to be slightly out of date imho...I remember a "were buying a dozen more" or so news item awhile back but then again I barely ever read them. Thats my 2c worth. On Tue, 2002-02-19 at 13:42, Paul Hammant wrote: > Marc, > > Apache as is is an Ivory tower. Projects come here infrequently and > Apache license is not a natural or obvious choice for peopel starting > projects elsewhere (typically sourceforge). > > Perhaps think of it this way, Apache with in partnership with > sourceforge mounts ApacheForge. Community principles and Ant usage are > pushed. Branding of site (refer again to the savvanah site) is the new > thing. Grouping of projects is a by product. People begin to think of > Apache license as a viable alternative to GPL and interest is generated. > From time to time really prominent projects migrate from there to > jakarta and are front page listed. > > The point is for a project to arrive at ApacheForge it is entirely > automatic, it gets easy mail-lists, secure(ish) CVS file and web hosting > without the efforts of the overstretched root dudes and dudettes here. > Projects don't have to be viable (given our current three committer > rules) to be kicked off. But above all, given the marketing/branding > side we turn back the tide against GPL a little. If we continue to sit > here and adjudicate with rigid rules on five projects a year joining > Jakarta the hurd will have replicated everything novel we were doing here. > > Look at Xerces. GPL software cannot import org.apache.anything. GPL > software can use any parser via the SAX API (approved). Thus GPL > software could use Xerces. For the last four months there has been a > GNU XML parser and it is viable. Thus Xerces is not the only choice > anymore. > > Oh never mind, if you don't agree you don't agree. > > - Paul > > >Paul, > > > >I still don't get it. What you've essentially proposed is SourceForge > >running on Apache hardware and named ApacheForge. The idea being, I think, > >that having 'Apache' in the name lends it some credibility. But you've also > >removed all the normal barriers to entry into the Apache community and that > >necessarily dilutes the value of the name Apache. You're trying to transfer > >the brand value of 'Apache' onto something new 'ApacheForge' without > >bringing along the stuff that allowed the brand to have value in the first > >place: our people and our processes. > > > >Now, some days I'm pretty dense, but just don't see how this is a good value > >proposition for Apache. Feel free to try to convince me, but right now I > >just don't see it. > > > >What I think would be cool is if more projects outside apache.org started > >using the Apache license or something derived from it. That would show that > >developers really value the license itself and the principles it's based on, > >not just the cool software we provide. > > > >Marc Saegesser > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Paul Hammant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >>Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 11:37 AM > >>To: Jakarta General List > >>Subject: Re: ApacheForge > >> > >> > >>Marc, > >> > >>It's a marketing thing. > >>This is more general than my AltRMI issue. > >>I think ApacheForge has merit irrespective of what happens to AltRMI. > >> > >>- Paul > >> > >>>-1 > >>> > >>>Since the proposed ApacheForge would have no real connection > >>> > >>with Apache > >> > >>>other than running on Apache hardware I don't really see the > >>> > >>value. How is > >> > >>>this different from starting a project on SourceForge and > >>> > >>building the > >> > >>>community that way? There's nothing stopping anyone from > >>> > >>using the Apache > >> > >>>license there. > >>> > >>>Now, don't read that as meaning that I think AltRMI should move to > >>>SourceForge, I don't. I also understand and sympathize with > >>> > >>the catch-22 > >> > >>>adding a new jakarta-commons committer that started this > >>> > >>whole discussion. > >> > >>>I think we should work out a solution to that problem, I > >>> > >>just don't think > >> > >>>that ApacheForge is the right solution. > >>> > >>> > >>>Marc Saegesser > >>> > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- www.superlinksoftware.com www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html - fix java generics! The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -Ambassador Kosh -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
