I would like to contribute more, but there is no clear roadmap/vision. I keep asking to myself, if imperius is already full featured and only needs maintenance and support ?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:55 PM, David Wood <daw...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > +1, I'm debugging through Java bindings as we speak... > > David Wood > Policy Technologies Group > IBM TJ Watson Research Center > daw...@us.ibm.com > 914-784-5123 (office), 914-396-6515 (mobile) > > > > > From: > Craig L Russell <craig.russ...@sun.com> > To: > imperius-dev@incubator.apache.org > Date: > 03/24/2010 01:39 PM > Subject: > Re: Future of Imperius > Sent by: > craig.russ...@sun.com > > > > It looks like the community is small (11 committers including 4 > mentors), but they have been able to produce a release that was voted > and shipped. Not a small task considering everything. > > I'd say it's time to see if there is enough diversity and an > interested enough community to graduate Imperius as a top level > project. I don't see another TLP that would be a good fit. > > The diversity standard is three committers independent of each other. > From what I know, there are two major organizations, Sun(Oracle) and > IBM who are involved, and I know there are unaffiliated committers, > but I don't know the affiliations of most of the non-Sun(Oracle), non- > IBM folks. > > Who is out there who is interested in continuing to be part of the > community? Please speak up now. Like by April 1. > > I agree with Kevan that we should announce the result of this thread > in our April report to the incubator and make a decision by July on > whether to shut this down or graduate it. > > Craig > > On Mar 24, 2010, at 8:29 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: > >> Oops. Let this slip by without responding... Apologies. >> >> On Mar 18, 2010, at 1:59 PM, David L Kaminsky wrote: >>> I think the lack of response to this e-mail kind of summarizes the >>> state pretty well. >>> >> :) >>> >>> IMO, Imperius is an excellent implementation of a policy engine, >>> but either (a) it hasn't been well publicized, so only a small >>> number of groups are using it, or (b) there is currently only a >>> small group of potential users. Or some of both. >>> >> To be clear, my comments / questions have nothing to do with the >> quality of the Imperius implementation nor with any of the >> committers on the project. >>> >>> That puts the project in an intermediate state -- a small user >>> base, perhaps growing very slowing, but with no immediate >>> expectation of accelerating growth. >>> >>> If there were a substantial cost to keeping Imperius going, I think >>> it would make sense to shut it down. However, I don't think that's >>> true. >>> >>> Unless there's a clear reason to shut it down -- and perhaps there >>> is one -- I'd suggest just seeing how it goes for awhile. I'd also >>> wonder if there are ways to better publicize the work. >>> >>> Anyway, just my 2 cents ... >>> >> Apache is interested in fostering healthy, diverse, meritocratic >> communities around open source projects. Incubation is not intended >> to be a never-ending process. I think we should put a timeline for >> making a community decision. >> >> Our next board report is April. The subsequent report is July. I >> propose we make the July Incubator board report a target for >> reaching a decision about what we think should happen to the >> Imperius community. >> >> What do others think? >> >> --kevan > > Craig L Russell > Architect, Oracle > http://db.apache.org/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@oracle.com > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > > > >
