incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <>
Subject Re: [DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - October 2016
Date Thu, 13 Oct 2016 10:36:05 GMT

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:57 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <>

> Hi John,
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:57 AM, John D. Ament <>
> wrote:
> > ....Below is the incubator board report....
> I object to the paragraphs quoted below about Mark Struberg and Tamaya
> and suggest removing them, reworking to avoid mentioning names or
> marking them <private>.

I have removed the section from the public report, added a single line
indicating a loss of team members, and sent an email (privately) to the
PPMC (not PPMS) with a proposed change to go in a private section.

> Our reports are meant to stay online forever, this excerpt is critical
> of Mark in a way that's not needed and goes into lots of details about
> that "alternative JSR" story, which are not relevant IMO about the
> podling's progress overall.

This is where things get hairy for this podling.  A JSR was one of their
goals since their proposal came through, as can be read on their initial

> Someone made a proposal, it was not accepted, that person left -
> that's all typical business in our projects.
> So maybe just summarize this as "a proposal was made for a different
> configuration JSR, which the PPMC didn't agree with, resulting in some
> people leaving the project" or something like that.
> (there's no PPMS by the way ;-)

Yep, fixed that for them as well.

> -Bertrand, with just my Incubator PMC hat on, nothing more
> > ...Mark Struberg tried to established his ideas of a configuration JSR.
> >   Though he was mentoring Tamaya his proposal did not match, what
> >   we did in the project and could have a large impact on the project.
> >   Even worse he did not collaborate with the project.
> >   The main committers and PPMS members of the project did a hangout,
> >   Where it has been decided that we will NOT change the API in favour of
> >   the ideas of Mark. On one side we already had that kind of discussion 2
> >   years ago and, on the other side an increasing number of people start
> to
> >   use the project, so breaking API changes do not make sense.
> >   Fortunately the Java community and Oracle did actively get in contact
> >   with us regarding the planned new “Java EE Configuration JSR” and
> >   see Tamaya as a very good base for building the configuration JSR with
> >   similar concepts. Given that one of the original main purposes has been
> >   achieved. As Mark failed with his ideas, he consequently quit his
> >   assignment as a project mentor....
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message