Interesting point in #4. The principal qualities that a mailing list has that make it suitable for the task are (a) archived and (b) asynchronous.
That is, the decisions that are made are archived for perpituity, and participants do not need to be online concurrently to engage in the conversation (e.g. allowing for timezone differences). In this case, mailing lists are being compared to the likes of private conversations, face to face meetings and IRC, which fail on one or more of the above. It seems that Wave could well meet both criteria, and thus it is conceivable that Wave could be accepted as a valid context for decision making at Apache. As to running an instance, Apache can make (virtual) hardware available to projects to run their own dogfood - so running an instance is certainly possible. Another benefit that wasn't listed was that of becoming a part of a larger software development community that shares a common approach. This can bring many intangible benefits (e.g. my career, for one, would be nothing of what it is now without my Apache connections). Upayavira On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:50 -0800, "Vega" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the answer. > So, if I understand it right, Wave in a Box potentially gets: > 1) Ability to receive donations - I am not sure it is really important > to the project. > 2) Legal protection - I have no clue about possible risks here. The > project is distributed under Apache 2.0 license, isn't it enough to > protect it? > 3) Copyright protection - Again no clue how important it is to the > project. Seems to me not really important. > 4)Hardware infrastructure - in fact the Apache infrastructure seems to > be inferior to current Wiab setup. Moreover, if I understand it right, > they insist that all communication and decision making should be done > with the mail lists - which prevents us from hosting dog food server > for the about needs. I think it is very severe limitations. Also svn > is inferior to mercurial. In fact I think that point (4) is in fact > disadvantage. > 5)The Apache brand name is nice, however Wave is already a strong > brand name in itself. > > So to summarize, it seems like point (4) poses severe immediate limits > on the project, while the benefits are not clear and not immediate. > Also, I don't understand what's the hurry to join the Apache incubator > right now. > The wave team has a very demanding goal - to have a functional version > working out out the box - as soon as possible, and it seems to me that > working on joining Apache now, only distracts us from working toward > reaching the main goal. > > > On Dec 1, 6:58 pm, Michael MacFadden <[email protected]> > wrote: > > There are several benefits to the Apache Organization, I can list a > > few here: > > > > 1) The Apache Software Foundation is an established non-profit 501(c) > > (3) corporation. As such it can provide a legal entity that can > > facilitate tax deductible financial contributions to a project. Right > > now with the project simply hosted at Google Code, there would be no > > real way for us to accept donations. > > > > 2) They protect the contributors from legal suits. Basically, if some > > one uses wave and incurs some damages, they can sue apache and the > > individual contributors / committers are legally shielded from that > > suit. > > > > 3) Apache will protect its brand and enforce the license. Again if > > some one doesn't play by the copyright rules governing the open source > > project Apache can take legal action on the projects behalf. > > > > 4) Apache has hardware infrastructure like project web site hosting, > > issue tracking, wikis, mailing lists, etc as well as a large mirrored > > content distribution network. > > > > 5) The Apache Brand name is strong, we will benefit from being > > associated with them. If we graduate to a Top Level Project, then it > > says to the rest of the world that we are at a certain maturity. > > > > This is not an inclusive list, but some of the major benefits. > > > > As for the risks, you do give up some control over how the project is > > governed. Apache runs projects as a meritocracy / democracy. There > > is no hierarchy of project owners and various levels of committers. > > This it self isn't bad or good, just pointing out that they have rules > > that projects have to play by. I personally like how they do things, > > but the point is that we have to bend to their will somewhat. Another > > related risks is we are somewhat beholden to their infrastructure. So > > for example they use Subversion for source control. Again we have to > > just go with the flow. We MUST use the Apache license for the code, > > and we can't ever "take the code back". Of course with the apache > > license if we wanted to we could always fork the project and move it > > somewhere else, but we can't ever revoke the license form apache. > > > > Basically, the idea here is that we are joining a community and by > > doing so are agreeing to transform our project to fit their existing > > model. Of course when we are an active member of that community we > > will get a voice in how the larger community operates. > > > > As for the alternatives, we could just leave the project where it is > > at google code, or move to something like source forge. The down side > > here is we don't get the legal or organizational protections that > > apache provides, nor do we get the brand name benefits. > > > > Michael > > > > On Dec 1, 2:59 am, Vega <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was closely following the discussion regarding wave in a box product > > > joining Apache. However, I couldn't see any real benefits to join > > > besides having "Apache" before the "Wave". I guess the "pros and cons" > > > discussions were held at the summit, but I couldn't access them. > > > I am not against the move, it's just I am not sure I understand the > > > consequences and the price. > > > So > > > 1. What are potential benefits? Are there things that Apache can > > > provide that will make the work of wane in a box developers easier? > > > 2. What are possible risks? I guess everything comes at price and > > > joining Apache will impose certain restrictions. What are them? > > > 3. Are there some alternatives? Maybe there are better ways to achieve > > > the same goal. > > > > > Thanks > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Wave Protocol" 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/wave-protocol?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" 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/wave-protocol?hl=en.
