cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: Is Apache Dead?
Date Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:53:19 GMT
marc fleury wrote:
> Thanks for forwarding this Neeme,

Yep. Good to have different points of view.

> my comments are in the mail
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stefano Mazzocchi []
> > Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 12:22 AM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Infozone

> > > Kevin Burton wrote: 
> > > course.  I would like to see Lucene and EJBoss under the ASF.
> > About EJBoss: they came to us offering to donate their code. We said: we
> > have to think about it. They replied: fine, if you don't want us, we'll
> > go on anyway.
> <facts>
> Well, I appreciate the "we have to think about it".
> What really happened is that java-apache folks voted *unanimously* +1,
> except for one guy from IBM, surprise surprise, who said this is an ASF
> decision.
> Then Brian Behlendorf came down and said "we" (royal we) have to wait... and
> that was the end of the democratic vote in the apache organization.
> </facts>

> There were two things going around
> 1- EJB, unlike JSP/servlet, is a VERY competitive COMMERCIAL market.  Apache
> trying to play it nice with IBM, SUN could not "nuke" the EJB market, close
> to $1B for all these guys.

Really? Sun and IBM are doing billions of dollars on EJB
implementations? didn't know that.

> 2- Brian and the rest of the bunch did NOT believe in EJB.

This is totally false: you proposed the donation, we voted yes, Brian
suggested to "wait until we get everything in place" (Jakarta was
happening and we were doing at that time so too many
irons were in the fire), you got pissed and ran away. And that was it.

>  I know for a
> fact that this hasn't changed in fact it is worse... Jon Stevens very
> recently went public on slashdot saying (and I quote) "
> <jonstevens>
> 'Sun Announces Java Executive Committee Members'
> Re:This is excellent news. (Score:1)
> by jonstevens on Friday June 02, @05:33AM EDT (#50)
> (User Info)
> We don't need EJB Server representation. There are already 2+ OSS EJB
> projects out there (I know, I host the CVS and mailing lists for one of them
> on my machines...JBoss). Not having it directly under the ASF, isn't doing
> us any harm at all because you can simply download the EJB servers from
> other locations. Big deal. Also, in my personal opinion only, EJB is a nasty
> buzz word that IS managers like to throw around. Only about 1% of the entire
> web application arena really needs it, the rest of the people who are
> developing on it are kidding themselves and wasting time/resources. It is
> entirely possible to have 100% stable servlet web applications without the
> need for the bulk that EJB adds. I wish that more people would wake up and
> more correctly evaluate the technologies they are using for the applications
> they are building instead of simply going along with Sun's marketing engine
> blindfolded. Yes, Sun does make good technologies, but not everyone has to
> use them for all cases. -jon
> </jonstevens>

Individuals don't speak for the ASF. You can either agree with Jon or
not. This doesn't change anything.

> wow, right? "we are kidding ourselves and wasting our time and
> ressources"...
> So I hope that this little bit explains a little bit better what is really
> going on in Apache, they are "IBM/SUN whipped" and they don't believe in the
> technological vision.

Curious interpretation of high level collaboration.
> > So Jon hosted them on [snip]
> Yes, along with other apache lists, we are still very grateful for that.
> > been told by several different people that EJBoss community is rather
> > messy and hard to deal with. Please, no offense intended, these are
> > things I'm just quoting, not my personal thoughts.
> How courageous... "I am just quoting ... not my personal thoughts..."

What should I do? I never talk about something I don't know.
> Here is a fighter I will want in my troups...

"*my* troups"?... 

> well hear me out, and I am NOT
> going to quote I am going to tell you exactly what I think about you guys.

I'm all ears.
> <import std_disclaimer>
> I will say that these are "mypersonalthoughts", and not the thoughts of the
> organization at large and certainly not the thoughts of the board (rickard,
> juha, dan and oleg) these are my personal thoughts.  They are however the
> thoughts of my employer ;-)
> </import>
> It is pretty obvious to me that the real reasons for EJBoss not joining
> Apache in September were commercial and technological.

It's pretty obvious that interpolations under the nyquist frequency
don't regenerate the original signal.

> In clear, that Brian
> did not want it so that the apache "democracy" was overturned despite a
> uninanimous vote. 

Brian clearly suggested to wait. Did not pose any whatsoever voting
overrule (he is not able to this even if he wanted to, I would the the
first to be pissed off but I know him well enough to guarantee you this
never happened and will never happen).

> It was commercial in the sense that IBM and SUN did not
> want to nuke a $1Bn market and so that dictated the politics as well.

That is your very personal vision and once you got enough samples to
interpolate that, you left the discussion without further comments.

>  It was
> technological in the sense that (and I did not see that one coming) that
> neither the pure Apache guys, nor the leading java crowd at apache really
> believed in the EJB technology anyway...  To jump to a conlusion on
> "attitude" on our part is a bit naive

??? you are quoting Jon for not believing in EJB, but Jon voted +1 for
the donation and also hosted you guys under and donated
bandwidth and resources.

If this is not "undersampling", I can't think of anything else that is.

Good, I don't.
> I will start with the technological vision.
> It is naive to think that servlet/DB is all you need.

No, it's worse that that, I agree.

> See the market today
> is for folks that already have their database and their schemas/SQL written
> and so going to servlet is the easy solution.  For those that come from the
> web and treat the persistence as a service, servlets don't answer squat.  In
> short what you are seeing now is just a normal evolution of the technology
> in time and the destination is still the component framework.  The WEB-OS is
> still what we are working on and servlets are a necessary part, not all
> though.  The only positive point is the catalina architecture that we feel
> with the interceptor layout (just like jboss 2.0 ;-) will be very easy to
> integrate.

I'm glad to know there is something you save in what we do.

> I see no vision in apache.  Just random growth from what was and remains the
> web server.

Arguing about this is pointless.

weak? we recently became members of the JCP EC process and you call that
weakness? I'd call it power.

> This is the thing that really bothers me about them.  I resent having what I
> consider a "aparachick" coming to me and telling me what open source and
> licenses are all about.
> Let's not forget that the guys under the apache umbrella HAVE IT EASY.  You
> just live off the buzz of apache and brand recognition (as Steffano says,
> they protect it).  Yes! protect it as much as you can because believe me,

So why did you approach us if you think we are so weak and our
technological visions so lost? to save us?
> You have no idea what it really takes to build a group, Brian does.

That's a pathetic underestimation of our power as a community.

Just an example: I built the Cocoon project myself and in 12 months we
have more than 400 people subscribed on the mail lists and 600 on the
users list. Jon, Pierpaolo and I started with JServ and created the
infrastructure around it to create in two years. I
helped set up the FOP community and I'm currently approaching three
other projects for donation to

Sure, Brian is one of the most brilliant persons I've ever met and was a
great mentor for many of us that started this open source thing around
Apache. But thinking of "Apache := Brian" it's pure ignorance of what
has been going on in the last three years (again, I'm talking for what I
know, I can't talk about what happened before my arrival)

> You
> just went to apache and it made you soft.  You got a distorded view of what
> the open source reality IS!!!.  See to say that we are "competitive, harsh"
> community is CORRECT! DONT FORGET we compete with Weblogic/BEA, Netscape,
> SUN, IBM, AOL, Gemstone, Progress, Fiorano, Allaire, and about 50 OTHER
> COMMERCIAL VENDORS (and we might win;-).  While you guys had what .... JRun
> (now allaire) as competition before SUN realized the market was so small it
> could snuff it with Tomcat and Jakarta...
> You have no idea...

Talking about attitude and presumption....
> No idea of the amount of time, of energy, of fight, of code, of recruitment,
> of motivation, of management, of personal money many of us had to put in the
> organization to make it strong.  You guys just joined a succesful and almost
> "on the retirement" army (where is the webserver market today?) and you come
> down and talk to a bunch of paratroopers and marines that sharpened their
> appetites and skills in battle and you talk to us with your finger going
> "no-no", "not good"... you are just fat rich ladies around a tea cup...
> your view of the battle field is academic.

What can I say? enjoy your battle. We like peace much more.
> and still does, it is our armour.  You don't see it because you don't need
> an armour, you have the apache big brother.

We need no armor because we are no fighters.
> Well hear me for my final plea...
> apache is dying, your protector is dying, wise up, stay strong stay low...
> join us!

Why? to "sharp my appetite and skills in battle"?

Sorry, man, but I love my peaceful view of the world and death is much
more frequent in battlefields than in green lawns. If this makes me a
"lady" in your vision of the world, well, I'll consider it a compliment.
> > My only impression (when they approached java.apache for donation) was
> > not that good: the behaved like they "deserved" it.
> wow! (we deserve to donate??? wow, talk about arrogance!!!!!!)  it was the
> case that at the time we were looking for *your help*. And trust me there
> was no arrogance at the time. You did not give it to us for the very good
> and pragmatic reasons outlined above, we understood it, you didn't or did
> not want to admit the reality of what the ASF was becoming, snap out of it!
> you are thinking like a corporate aparachick fat cat that has nothing to do
> but interpret the attitudes of the other ladies around their cucumber
> sandwiches.

Oh, god, you're right... what a fool I've been, how wise you are, my
lord, to open my eyes... woman, where is my sword? the king asks for our
help, those windmills won't wait for us, we have to blast them now
before it's too late...

> But YES! we have changed our attitude now...
> you don't deserve us anymore, that's my gut feeling.
> We are cutting it by ourselves, the architecture is there, the critical mass
> is there. We are going all out with project Game Over...

So this is the signal in your noisy message? Ok, roger.
> > About Kevin's idea of using the ASF as a rocket launching platform for
> > every java project on the server side... well, that would suck. It would
> > waste our name and tear the community in pieces.
> >
> > This is why GNU has a strong license with no formal process and the ASF
> > has strong formal processes with a light license. To keep the name
> > valuable.
> arrogance.  GNU has done so much for the open source world... comparing the
> ASF to GNU is a bit premature. 

Why? I was just comparing two different ideas. I was not measuring the
amount of influece they've done to the open source (well, "free
software" to please RMS) in general.

> All of us young puppies weren't yet touching
> our wee-wees as teenagers when the GPL and GNU was already working on what
> became the basis for GNU-Linux.  Have more stuff under your belt (and not
> just FAT) before comparing your stuff to theirs.
> > Apache doesn't incubate projects anymore: a project must be already
> > started to be hosted and must already prove its value by itself. (not
> > being perfect or even finished, but valuable and respected)
> what makes you think you are so valuable.  What makes you think you are this
> elitist club..
> > This is why we were afraid of EJBoss: the EJB open source community is
> > very fragmented and very unfriendly to each other... why is that? Do we
> > really want to stick our heads into that yet?
> Again, because you grow fat under Apache you don't realize the war going on,
> you don't realize what is at stake and you don't realize what is really
> needed to fight... Ladies, can we get your attention now?

Tell me: what should I fight? Sun? IBM? GNU? You? 


Wouldn't it be easier to create a project about EBJ with code from all
the open source projects and integrate them? join forces to create a
reference implementation that all companies can use (also your own!) and
create a de-facto EJB standard?

You are saying we are doomed because we lack this "us vs. them" vision
of technology you seem to like so much.

I say exactly the opposite.

> > I myself helped to create or port _many_ projects under the Apache flag
> > (JMeter, Avalon, JAMES, Cocoon, Tomcat, Ant, FOP) and many more will
> > come in the future.
> >
> > But if you look carefully from 30000 feet, there is a scheme: you can
> > see sort of Natzca pictures down below that cover the field of server
> > side technologies. But this is not a random collection and never will be
> > until I'm around.
> ...  Steffano, I am not sure there is a vision there... sorry

Well, Marrrc, I do. 

That's what it counts for me and for the thousands of developers that
share my opinion on this.
Stefano Mazzocchi      One must still have chaos in oneself to be
                          able to give birth to a dancing star.
<>                             Friedrich Nietzsche
 Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------

View raw message