This is the link below that I cannot seem to locate.

On 8/30/2016 11:25 PM, Adam John wrote:
Created a GitHub organization, added each of the available repos:
https://github.com/ApacheWave

I think I invited everyone on this thread - however there are many others
on the list.
All are welcome.

Loss of Apache incubator status is significant as it means also
organizational loss, tools lost, and would effectively put a nail in the
coffin for the project.

WebCMS, Jira, Jenkins, and Travis are all valuable tools, and part of
Incubator status.

Quality code review (thanks, vega and wisebaldone etc) and an established
process for the inclusion of new contributions by people familiar with
existing approaches and the work in progress... all of this is significant.

The people on this list - and even the list itself - both a service and an
organization that would be a significant loss in any transition...

I think the safety of the incubator is important, for these reasons and
more; and there needs to be improved communication, planning and
coordination... here again, just my opinion.

AJ

Adam John
(914) 623-8433
Google+ <http://google.com/+AdamJohn1> | LinkedIn <http://mradamjohn.com/>

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:

The best future for Wave at Apache would, I think be to start an
entirely new project at GitHub, and implement a Wave system that people
can actually understand. Once that gains traction, come back to the
Incubator and ask to resurrect Apache Wave with that new codebase.

The current codebase seems to be simply too complex for people to be
able to pick up. The idea stands as a good one, but the code is just too
complex.

Upayavira

On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 09:58 PM, Taylor Fahlman wrote:
I've been a reader of this list for a while. I am another one of the
people
who would love to contribute, but literally have no idea where to start.
I
really think that if the code was divided a bit more it'd be easier to
contribute, because I want to see this project keep going. It really does
have a lot of potential in the current climate of silo-ed communication
systems. An easy docker image would really help too.

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:54 PM Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

While the code will always be there in some form, is there any real
hope outside of Apache though? will it not just fizzle out?
Apache provides somewhat needed pressure, structure and to some extent
even prestige.

While retirement is understandable necessity for things without
progress, its nevertheless sad for a project with such potential.  Is
it possible to put a call out for developers? a last warning? a
advert? something beyond this list?
I have no idea what form it would take though. I am so ignorant with
big projects, both socially and structurally. Theres tools out there
supposed to help motivate and organised (www.teamily.com) dont know
how effectively they are though.

It just all seems such a waste for wave to die, its death marking a
little lost hope for the open web to recover some ground from the
closed hubs that dominate today.

--
http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site.
http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator.


On 30 August 2016 at 21:41, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
Michael,

As I said earlier in this thread, retirement means the closure of an
"apache" community. The code is already open source. So long as the
trademark and the Apache License V2 on the code are respected, as
now,
anyone is free to do what they like with the code.

Thus, if someone (or someones) wanted to move it to Github, that'd be
fine. I'm sure Apache wouldn't object to them using the name "Wave"
in
some form.

Upayavira

On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 08:54 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
Yuri,

Being a mostly silent participant at this point.  I would tend to
agree
with you.  I think however, we should provide a “what next”
option.  So
for example, people might be more willing to retire the project if
they
knew for example we could move to github and still allow people to
contribute and develop if they see fit.

~Michael

On 8/30/16, 11:52 AM, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com> wrote:

     After some thought I hate to agree, that at current levels of
     participation
     the only rational choice is to decide to retire as we are just
     wasting
     Apache Foundation resources without any real hope of graduating.
     Moreover, there were a few active projects based on Apache Wave
that
     felt
     little motivation to contribute back actively. I think this is
     because they
     found little need in Apache Foundation resources, while
contributing
     back
     required certain effort to comply with Apache rules.

     I think we should hold a retirement vote and either recruit
     sufficient
     number of supporters willing and able actively participate
     immediately, or
     retire.

     On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:13 PM Jonathan Leong <
jon.le...@gmail.com
     wrote:

     > I would hate to see this project retire.
     >
     > Adam you bring up good points. I can get the ball rolling with
the Docker
     > image. I'll see what I can get done over the next week or so.
     >
     >
     > -Jonathan Leong
     >
     >
     > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Adam John <
a...@sterlingsolved.com>
wrote:
     >
     > > I have to weigh in and say that I agree that the bar here
was
set high
     > from
     > > several perspectives.
     > >
     > > I'm currently evaluating what components of this project
can be
most
     > useful
     > > for incorporation into 2 separate projects. If either one
moves
forward
     > in
     > > the next 6 months, there will be more developers actively
involved here.
     > >
     > > That said, I've watched some of the transition videos from
Google folks
     > and
     > > read a lot of the docs, reviewed code and worked on
implementing this
     > > project for myself.  It is daunting and would benefit
overall
from 2
     > > significant - imho critical - updates;
     > > (1) the Product itself needs real changes - like the
concept of
bots
     > needs
     > > pulled out from core terminology and revamped as a more
current
common
     > > concept / ie agents.  There needs to be better organization
of
the
     > Product
     > > from concept to contribution.  This is not to diminish the
vast
resources
     > > present, only to highlight an improvement area.
     > > (2) the Architecture needs serious review and revision to
figure out how
     > > best to leverage other projects and allow focus on the
specific
benefits
     > > this project enables.  The technology stack overall needs
better
     > separation
     > > at least from a newcomers perspective.
     > > As a third factor, and #1 on my list for adoption is rolling
docker
     > images
     > > for the project.  This is essential in my humble opinion to
allow new
     > > developers to focus on the pieces they feel most equipped to
contribute
     > > comfortably...
     > >
     > > I don't know how the major changes I am suggesting get
introduced and
     > > discussed in much more detail.  I'm hoping that perhaps I
lieue
of a
     > > potentially dismissive email "vote" ... Maybe a virtual
conference would
     > be
     > > of interest?  I would hope that the participants of such a
convention
     > would
     > > be the core of a nascent rebirth.  Yes I am volunteering to
help take
     > this
     > > on if there is interest...
     > >
     > > Thanks,
     > >
     > > Adam John
     > > (914) 623-8433
     > >
     > > On Aug 30, 2016 12:43 PM, "Zachary Yaro" <zmy...@gmail.com>
wrote:
     > >
     > > I am in a similar boat.  I have front-end development
skills,
but I
     > > struggle to fully understand the back-end functionality or
begin
     > separating
     > > the client from the server.
     > >
     > > Zachary Yaro
     > >
     > > On Aug 30, 2016 11:51 AM, "Thomas Wrobel" <
darkfl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
     > >
     > > > I have tried on 3 separate occasions to understand the
server. Its
     > > > simply not in my skillset and I don't have the time to
learn.
I don't
     > > > wish to sound arrogant there, theres learning needed for
anything of
     > > > course. But its too much investment -  I want to apply
skills
that I
     > > > already have. Last time I tried to get into wave
development
(which
     > > > was I admit a few years back) it took me 3 days to even
compile the
     > > > server. Which is frustrating for someone that just wants
to
work on a
     > > > client.
     > > >
     > > > So I am certainly not waiting for permission, I am waiting
for a
     > > > prerequisite  of a server/client split. I understand I can
neither
     > > > demand or expect such a thing. Developers on a project
like
this just
     > > > have to jump in on what they feel like. Nothing can
really be
expected
     > > > and I accept that.
     > > > I simply am informing there's "lesser" developers like me
that could
     > > > work on bits if certain other things happen.
     > > >
     > >
     >






---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Reply via email to