From activemq-dev-return-269-apmail-geronimo-activemq-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Thu Mar 16 15:52:48 2006 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 68692 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2006 15:52:45 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Mar 2006 15:52:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 92392 invoked by uid 500); 16 Mar 2006 15:52:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-activemq-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 92343 invoked by uid 500); 16 Mar 2006 15:52:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact activemq-dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 37244 invoked by uid 99); 16 Mar 2006 01:34:08 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OIMO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) From: "Noel J. Bergman" To: , Cc: , Subject: RE: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:33:47 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N David Blevins wrote: Lots of good stuff, thanks. :-) > If you ask me what my opinion on OpenEJB's future or James' opinion > on ActiveMQ's future, we'll both probably tell you TLP is a good > goal eventually. > We've more or less been running as TLPs in relation to Geronimo for > the past two plus years already, just at Codehaus. We've seen how > that plays out and we'd like to try a much more unified front for a > while and see what shakes out. > The Geronimo world is awkward and unbalanced. We have too tight > integration with OpenEJB such that the standalone version of that > completely disappeared [, and too little integration with ActiveMQ.] > We're aren't successfully leveraging each other's communities > to the fullest. All in all, we don't make decisions together > and lean on each other as much as we could. How is merging the communities into the Geronimo TLP going to correct these problems? Is the Geronimo PMC prepared to add all of you as Committers on the TLP, and add all or most of you to the Geronimo PMC? Is this going to result in a single community, or more integrated, better, meeting place for multiple communities? If the latter, that would indicate to me that you really should be a TLP. See Henri's e-mails for a fuller discussion of Federation. And what about community growth? When TLPs have sub-projects, how do they go about building up each sub-project? How quick would the target PMC be to grant TLP karma and PMC status to people interested in working on just one of these disjoint projects? Or would it have disjoint karma, and a smaller number of people with binding votes? See Henri's and Robert's comments on these issues. > I'd really like to see all our projects rolled up, balanced out, then > split up again along possibly different lines with potentially more > standalone pieces than we see now. So you see putting everything together in Geronimo as a first step towards a significant reorganization, with multiple TLPs? > TLP is a good goal, but I really see value in the journey. So do I. The question appears to be where/how to take that journey. :-) --- Noel