Mailing-List: contact activemq-dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
In-Reply-To: <441616F7.7030703@Golux.Com>
References: <NBBBJGEAGJAKLIDBKJOPAEHBHAAC.noel@devtech.com>
 <347D69F6-84D1-40EA-8562-8FFC9610044D@iq80.com> <441616F7.7030703@Golux.Com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <630340EA-EDFC-4A37-A2B8-116B7966D05E@iq80.com>
Cc: pmc@incubator.apache.org, activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org,
        dev@geronimo.apache.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com>
Subject: Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:31:40 -0800
To: pmc@geronimo.apache.org

On Mar 13, 2006, at 5:05 PM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>
>> I understand this concern and agree with the solution, but we should
>> remember that AMQ entered the incubator before this was a rule, so I
>> for one didn't think it appled to them, since they are so close to
>> graduation.
>
> 'So close to graduation'?  Whence comes that?  I think that
> proximity is still very much up in the air, particularly given
> Noel's opinion that

If you read the email history, you will see that it was stated that  
the new rules would only apply to "projects close to gradation".  So  
I hope you can see my point, regardless of if you agree with that point.

>> .. and the ASF community building is only just getting started.  No
>> PPMC, yet, for which we need more Mentors.
>
> These have nothing to do with when it entered incubation; the
> need for a PPMC has been there right along, and the 'ASF
> community building' is a sine qua non.  (I have no opinion,
> myself, about the degree of 'ASF community building' that
> has occurred in ActiveMQ.)

When AMQ entered the incubator as a sponsored project from Geronimo,  
the current understanding of incubator rules was that AMQ would  
simply use the Geronimo pmc since the Geronimo pmc is expected to be  
the home for the project.  Since then the incubator rules have been  
rewritten several time and based on the emails I saw today, the  
current rules that Noel is promoting (3+ mentors) hasn't even be  
approved by the incubator.  I personally find this incredibly  
frustrating, so please take my comments with a grain of salt.

If you ask me setting up a separate pmc for these projects is an  
incrediably bad idea.  Our objective is to create a single community  
between Geronimo, ActiveMQ, OpenEJB, ServiceMix and WADI.  Putting  
these projects into separate boxes makes this very difficult.

I would like to know, why have the incubator rules changed to, in my  
opinion, force all projects TLP?   Maybe the incubator is the wrong  
place to bring these types projects.  Is there another process to  
bring in a project we plan on integrating?  If not, maybe the board  
should consider setting something else up.

-dain