incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <>
Subject Re: Outside view on incubator policy to initial committer list
Date Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:43:49 GMT
Hey Martijn,

do keep sending these e-mails. Less replies doesn't mean that its  
less valuable.

On Oct 3, 2006, at 9:38 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Just to pose an outsider view, being new to the ASF and not to hijack
> the discussion on the CFX/CeltiXFire, I would like to share my views
> on the policy of the incubator.

I'm gonna respond in the generic rather than specific points.

Rest assured, the whole CXF thread doesn't apply to projects like  
Wicket. Where wicket was a solid open source community already, CXF  
was an attempt to start something by merging something corporate with  
something open source, pour in some unknowns, and then hope for the  

Where wicket's technology space is essentially well-understood by  
most incubator PMC members (and asf peeps world wide, most likely),  
the stuff CXF focusses on is still buzzword-ridden and thus well- 
avoided by many.

Do you really think a wicket contributor would've waited two months  
for his account if the people around him would've been happily  
committing code? Do you think you would've? I would guess board@  
would've known about it by then, if not slashdot...

...It is simply a world of difference. Which makes writing a single,  
sane, understandable, clear, permanent, policy for both (well, n,  
there's a new world every time there's a new project) quite hard  
(I've never understood why we try, but that's another subject). For  
example, where I'll happily go and weigh what wicket contributors  
contributed to wicket before it came to apache (especially if those  
contributors rub my nose in it), I'm not gonna care a rat's ass what  
Joe Corporate Developer Who Is Unknown To Google Or  
contributed to a corporate codebase before his company came to apache.

Bluntly, a project like Wicket starts at 90% "community clearance  
done" (just some IRC things to convince people of ;) ), that other  
project starts at -20%-100% depending on which company it came from.

In the end, this means you don't put your trust into the process. You  
put your trust into the people that make that process work, and into  
processes where what those people say and do (and vote) matters above  
and beyond most (some of it is legal shtuff, can vote all you like  
there, ain't gonna help) process description.

Which, getting back to CXF, is now getting me really worried, since  
its champion and most active mentor resigned from his position.


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

View raw message