incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Let's rewind!!! (Re: [VOTE] accept donation of a business process engine into the ServiceMix project)
Date Fri, 03 Feb 2006 23:14:29 GMT
I'm trying to sort out the issues here.  As I understand Sybase wants  
to donate the code and keep working on it in a community larger than  
the Sybase developers working on it :-)

It seems to me that depending where the code comes into Apache  
different groups of people get to work on it from the start:

-- incubator headed to top level project.  IIUC basically any apache  
committer including all the servicemix developers and perhaps others  
can join the project basically by saying they want to.

-- incubator headed to separate geronimo component.  IIUC geronimo  
committers can join the project easily, others less easily.

-- incubator as part of servicemix.  IIUC servicemix developers join  
with sybase developers.  It's harder for others to join.

I'm not quite sure I've interpreted everything correctly but I think  
that some people from apache ws are interested in working on this  
project.  If the above is accurate then incubator headed towards top  
level project would most easily result in the largest community.   
Conversely the "part of servicemix" option gives the appearance of  
potentially excluding people who want to contribute.

Technically I know just about nothing about this field.  However one  
of the goals of geronimo has been to get the components we use to  
communicate through fairly well defined and stable interfaces.  (I  
will leave aside the question of whether we have succeeded to any  
noticeable extent).  From this point of view I think it might improve  
the decoupling to have the bpel engine separate from servicemix.   
Could someone with some technical knowledge comment on the possible  
linkage and dependencies between sybase-bpel and servicemix?

At the moment my perspective on this situation is that:
- although I would love to see a good bpel integration into geronimo,  
a bpel subproject of geronimo is out of scope.
- the best choice of incubator location is that which will promote  
the largest community.  If only servicemix developers are interested  
then servicemix is a fine location.  If there are a significant  
number of people who want to work on sybase-bpel but not servicemix,  
then a separate incubator project headed for TLP is more  
appropriate.  Another possibility would be for servicemix to add all  
the people who want to work on sybase-bpel.  I would expect that this  
would have a bad effect on the servicemix community, but I have no  
experience  to justify this opinion with.


many thanks
david jencks

On Feb 3, 2006, at 1:13 PM, Bill Flood wrote:

> Dims, I'll take Cory off the hook since he was acting in good faith on
> behalf of Sybase :-).
> As we are learning, there are a variety of ways to work within the  
> Apache
> process as long as the community is supportive.  From the Sybase
> perspective, we are interested in working with a vibrant community  
> in a
> meaningful way that balances the needs of the community with that  
> of our
> own.
> when we first started thinking about the open source path, we  
> looked at
> Agila and communicated with the developers.  While the Agila  
> developers were
> quite helpful, the project was not open to our contribution and our
> assessment was that their existing code line would take substantial  
> work to
> bring it up to where we thought we already were.
> When we looked at ServiceMix, we found a mature community that not  
> only
> appeared open to a contribution such as ours but one which would  
> help us
> establish a good affinity with the ESB.  The Sybase folks working  
> on this
> code line will continue to vigorously support the orchestration  
> component
> and provide help in adjacent areas related to SCA.
> At this point, we feel comfortable in our contribution to the  
> ServiceMix
> project based on the positive uptake.  Under the rules of  
> meritocracy, we
> will work to ensure that the interfaces remain clean and the build  
> granular
> enough to be reused and hope to work with you in the future.
> Best Regards,
> Bill
>>  -------Original Message-------
>>  From: Davanum Srinivas < >
>>  Subject: Re: Let's rewind!!! (Re: [VOTE] accept donation of a  
>> business
> process engine into the ServiceMix project)
>>  Sent: 02 Feb '06 21:12
>>  Cory,
>>  Could you please get James' help and draft a complete proposal?
>>  Please see
>>  for a list of proposals, their format and their content.
>>  Once the proposal is ready, please post it to general@incubator.  
>> Also,
>>  please take a peek at the documentation on the
>> site especially w.r.t to the incubation
>>  process, what to expect and steps involved.
>>  thanks,
>>  dims
>>  On 2/2/06, cory <> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> BPEL 1.1 is supported.  The code works with Axis 1.3.
>>> Sybase wants this code to be successful within the community and is
>>> going to work to support it.
>>> Cheers,
>>> -cory
>>> On 2/2/06, Davanum Srinivas <> wrote:
>>>> Folks,
>>>> There is no proposal, there is just a zip, unless someone is a
>>>> clairvoyant, we can't figure out things like. *PLEASE* CC
>>>> general@incubator.
>>>> - Which specific version of the spec is implemented?
>>>> - Where are the list of known issues?
>>>> - Where is the TODO list?
>>>> - Why is Axis version 1.2 RC1 (and not even Axis 1.2 final even  
>>>> if we
>>>> forget that the current version is Axis 1.3)
>>>> - Is there any relation to workflow?
>>>> - Is there no opportunity for interaction with our Existing
> incubation
>>>> project Agila?
>>>> - Are there people from sybase who will be working?
>>>> - Geronimo is becoming an umbrella rapidly and now ServiceMix wants
> to
>>>> be one too?
>>>> - Why are people talking as though the code is FINAL
>>>>   (Quoting greg - "there is no need to develope a community around
> this code")
>>>>   (Quoting Rob - "If you've looked at the proposed donated code,  
>>>> this
>>>> BPEL engine is complete, I can't see any sense in combining it with
>>>> something else ?" )
>>>> - Do *ANY* of the existing servicemix committers know this code
> inside out?
>>>> - If people are not going to touch this contrib code with a barge
> pole
>>>> then why should it be accepted?
>>>> thanks,
>>>> dims
>>>> On 2/2/06, James Strachan <> wrote:
>>>>> We have received the generous donation of a complete and working
>>>>> engine to the ServiceMix project...
>>>>> 200602.mbox/%
>>>>> the contributor has offered to donate to Apache & complete the
>>>>> necessary software grants & IP clearance and to work with us on
>>>>> integrating it into ServiceMix.
>>>>> For those of you maybe not aware; ServiceMIx is an ESB project
>>>>> defined around JBI (JSR 208) the JCP standard API to integration
>>>>> components along with being the standard container model for a  
>>>>> BPE.
>>>>> ServiceMix already has the JBI container and has a suite of JBI
>>>>> integration components already for smart routing, transformation,
>>>>> rules, scripting, auditing etc...
>>>>> So it makes complete sense to add a BPE to that component suite.
> Note
>>>>> that since ServiceMix already has integration components to Apache
>>>>> Axis and Apache Tuscany, the integration of the BPE with  
>>>>> ServiceMix
>>>>> should benefit those projects too (with Apache Synapse possibly  
>>>>> too
>>>>> via the Axis integration - though we need to work on that one a
> bit).
>>>>> Also having a BPE fully integrated into Geronimo via the JBI
>>>>> container would mean that we could start to orchestrate pretty  
>>>>> much
>>>>> everything in the Geronimo stack! I'm certainly very excited by
> this
>>>>> move...
>>>>> [ ] +1 accept the donation into the ServiceMix incubator project
>>>>> [ ] 0  don't mind either way
>>>>> [ ] -1 I object because: .......
>>>>> Here's my +1
>>>>> James
>>>>> -------
>>>> --
>>>> Davanum Srinivas :
>>  --
>>  Davanum Srinivas :

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message