On Dec 3, 2013, at 8:09 PM, Issac Roth <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is Issac (the bald one) from StrongLoop. We're active sponsors of the
> Node.js project in core, modules, meetups, evangelism, etc, but not in any
> kind of leadership way like Joyent.
>
> We think Node.js should move to a foundation. (Eclipse or Mozilla, not
> Apache.) We think it hurts Node.js adoption for it to be perceived to be
> owned by Joyent. Our business is an mBaaS based on Node.js and we want
> Node.js to be widely adopted for our own success.
>
> Some developers don't want to contribute to something they feel is owned by a
> corporation. Some companies won't approve adoption of Node because they're
> concerned that its future is uncertain since it's owned by a small private
> company. They ask, "what if Joyent is acquired by our competitor? Or by
> insert-big-evil-co-here." We can explain how the community can fork in that
> case, but you have to be sophisticated about open source to understand that
> logic chain and most people don't.
>
Sorry, I disagree with the above. Forking open source is not sophisticated
logic for *developers*. It might be for regular users or business people, but
you are speaking of developers above and I would find it surprising to come
across one who does not understand open source and forking.
> Uncertainty creates concern, which gives people a reason to not use Node.
> Broader adoption of Node leads to its continued support and progress and I
> think most of us want that. The current situation doesn't make the future
> certain and it doesn't make governance transparent (because Joyent can make
> decisions unilaterally.) Newcomers don't realize that Joyent has been good so
> far and how can they trust that they'll be good in the future.
If anything, the episode that triggered this thread seems to demonstrate that
“good”ness doesn’t come from non-owner stewards. IMHO, we, the users of Node
(or any open source project), are at the mercy of a few core developers. The
more this team is mature/wise and responsive to the community (and not just
merely in a technical sense), the greater our (or at least my) confidence.
And while we are at it, what of V8? If we are to worry about the ownership of
Node, doesn’t that worry extend in greater magnitude to V8?
The only improvement that would strengthen Node, as it would *all* Open Source,
is the GPL. But the GPL is for quixotic reasons controversial among exactly
those who benefit from it, so I am not inviting a fork of this thread into that
old debate.
Now, FWIW, if Node went anywhere near something like Eclipse (and the implied
IDE-driven/centric development philosophy), I’d be a lot more alarmed,
personally (for reasons outlined in my earlier concern about Apache).
I readily admit mine may be a minority view,
—ravi
>
> Finally, the alignment of interests isn't as pure as it could be. When you
> read posts or hear speakers, try to map who has a commercial relationship
> with Joyent. Many of the most outspoken community members do. That may or may
> not taint their opinions - it’s not transparent.
>
> All that said, there is too much commercial interest for Joyent in owning
> Node.js (it is after all an asset with enterprise value), and I suspect the
> team feels they have earned the right to own it due to their stewardship to
> this point. For these reasons alone I doubt they'll let it go.
>
> We can do stuff to change the harmful perception without asking Joyent to do
> something their investors and history won't let them do:
>
> - We can distance Node.js a little from Joyent, and hopefully they will even
> help with this. A neutral Node.js is one that more people can get behind
> without question.
>
> - Posters can disclose their commercial relationships with Joyent if any.
>
> - We can be more explicit about the difference between node.js core, where
> Joyent has special jurisdiction, and community where they're like the rest of
> us.
>
> What do you think?
>
--
--
Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
Posting guidelines:
https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"nodejs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
