incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Endre Stølsvik <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto
Date Sun, 03 Feb 2008 01:26:01 GMT
Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Endre Stølsvik wrote:
>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>> Sure, activity is not that high, and there's not a *huge* developer 
>>> community, but there does not really seem to be any problem, either. 
>>> Apache doesn't require projects to be huge successes (by whatever 
>>> metric) as long as they're healthy and self-sustaining.
>> This was not healthy up until quite recently - I'd even question 
>> whether the code and the community is _healthy_ now. And the main 
>> point was that IBM, the dumpsters, fled the plot pretty fast after the 
>> import was done, not bothering about creating The Healthy Community 
>> around the code they off-loaded before leaving.
>> This should raise at least some slight concerns in Apache, IMO. 
> Endre,
> Disclosure... I work for IBM.
> I agree with your concern about code dumping and I completely respect 
> your comments.  However, I object to the logic you are applying here. 
> IBM'ers participate on projects as individuals and it's the actions of 
> individuals that should be judged.  To tar all IBM'ers because of bad 
> behavior (perceived or real) of a few is just wrong.

I don't group all IBM'ers, really - I actually believe IBM'ers do tons 
of good in many open source projects. Also I think IBM itself is a 
somewhat good open source citizen in several regards.

But it is not individuals that propose this particular project, as I 
understand it: it is IBM and BEA. And it was IBM that, in my view, 
dumped the JSR 168 RI and then fled - not any individuals as such.

I don't think Apache necessarily is the right place to dump a JSR RI and 
TCK implementation (because, lets face that, it isn't *developed* here) 
- it goes against the entire grain of Apache, AFAIU.

At least, if it is put here, then just don't pretend that it more than 
that either: It's just the RI and TCK implementations, staying at Apache 
as Apache are good guardians of code on a general basis.

Thus, if it happens, this particular project's name shouldn't be 
anything fancy, probably not include the name "Apache", maybe just be 
JSR-235 with two subfolders: RI and TCK.
   On the other side, some server implementing JSR-235 could be called 
Apache What-Ever, would run its own incubation, have its own 
infrastructure, possibly use the RI as a code starting point - but 
nothing more. This would keep the distinction very clear. The goals 
seems too different to mix.


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

View raw message