On Wed, 28 Dec 2011, Felix Schwarz wrote:
On 28.12.2011 10:25, Anatoly Techtonik wrote:
There is an opinion that WANdisco tries to gain market share by pretending
they are the major driving force behind the open source communities that
support projects like Subversion and Trac. But in case of Trac the marketing
efforts can be wasted, because IIUC none of WANdisco employers have a trail of
commits to Trac core. So, the best way to build up a "reputation" is to place
WANdisco members name on the official page of Apache Software Foundation with
Trac and Apache logos and a new project name announcement. And then include
this new project name in all marketing materials.
The strategy that hurts an ecosystem.
Sorry but I think that this conclusion is unfounded and does WANdisco wrong.
From my talks with them I have the impression that they really like to drive
an open source trac forward.
Also there is at least Mat Booth which has a bit of Trac experience.
Somebody said that there is no time to review changes from Wd members.
That was cboos+rblank, the two most knowlegable Trac developers. I guess we
should trust them with the assessment.
I'm not the big Trac developer, as Trac is only a tool I need to manage my
current main software, but still I agree with Anatoly, that the way it is
presented currently seems strange to me.
If WANdisco would have done major changes and improvements or even lots of
ticket fixes and the patches would have been ignored for a long time, then
I would agree something is wrong and a fork probably necessary.
But although I'm not really happy with the progress of Trac I can't blame
Trac maintainers for ignoring patches. They ignore bug reports (a logical
effect due to missing resources), but the don't ignore provided help.
So I doubt the motives of a fork are really positive.
The proper way would be to participate and help driving Trac into future.
When during this process development is moved to other servers and
maintaining is done mainly by WANdisco then this seems fine to me.
Is Edgewall still operating? My impression is that it is inactive and all Trac
developers are employed by other companies/self-employed. Also you can't
seriously compare the Apache Foundation with a tiny company.
And last but not least it's not only about a legal entity but also about
Apache being a foundation which won't turn around and leave which is possible
for any commercial entity.
Actually I don't understand why "company" should be better. I do both
commercial software development and open source and most of the time the
open source projects (when at least minimal successful) have much higher
quality than everything commercials are able to produce. Software
development does not need a company behind. The last 20 years showed this
clearly.
Ciao
--
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac
Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-dev@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
trac-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.
