activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ & ActiveMQ's next generation
Date Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:41:37 GMT
That's what I'm getting from Hadrian and Art.  I'm 100% sure that's not what they intend. 
I hope they can restate their concerns in a way that I can understand and that makes it clear
that's not what they meant.  One thing that would really help me would be to say what they
do want rather than what they don't want.

I want activemq to have a clear path to a long term future with a scalable broker, with a
community that is working together towards this goal, inclusive, and growing.

thanks
david jencks

On Mar 27, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Tracy Snell <tsnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> It’s more like “Railroading without consensus not welcome here”.  No one is upset
that someone is working too hard. Yet another completely ridiculous assertion. 
> 
>> On Mar 27, 2015, at 2:57 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com.INVALID>
wrote:
>> 
>> It certainly makes me feel like "innovation not welcome here" and "if we let you
in, don't work too hard or we'll get upset"
> 


Mime
View raw message