Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 82846 invoked from network); 3 May 2009 09:26:15 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 May 2009 09:26:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 34512 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2009 09:26:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 34468 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2009 09:26:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 34458 invoked by uid 99); 3 May 2009 09:26:15 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 May 2009 09:26:15 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of hirsch.dick@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.172 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.219.172] (HELO mail-ew0-f172.google.com) (209.85.219.172) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 May 2009 09:26:07 +0000 Received: by ewy20 with SMTP id 20so6155751ewy.12 for ; Sun, 03 May 2009 02:25:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=LNrvOVy/5y8ResUTMx447MM2oxNvEHztHHr1Oi4COlM=; b=UeMJDgKwgqMGtEVosu3yYKf57tNrBOfBowjsXu+M0lKW9e/TPIN1Rn5EEffqDXfag3 FUB7fiugYzqsbxX3pLY0xjol0TV4wQH4zLdv8uBP224jGgZODw+xO3PO6S2bSaGKkxAi NQ01xYYbEjag89QUWJWsL0Oe0cilMLY6a7in8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=DzBxYycb7yAFluHRj/kLCRGWScmpV/r8wZl6a92/6tKI/sRi+F6lC4lhmf0oMAeYyf gL9yVQ1dyzfB4gaiQhgpYrgotl32yTNdKAUdjN8GrQJxdPVXuTdyTflx1dqhkRJk6u4g WjMGTKr24RBfpltcTzQT2vfHyeXnAJlGZaRFE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.2.212 with SMTP id 62mr1307752wef.150.1241342746650; Sun, 03 May 2009 02:25:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <3d89f1770905020952s343cb7f0yee0973837ba295f9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 11:25:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Nobody from the ASF is helping (ESME) sustain or build momentum or community From: Richard Hirsch To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364d2597756a510468fea1c0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --0016364d2597756a510468fea1c0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with Vassil in that the main issue deals with the creation of exceptional open-source code and the different ways to build the community to support such code. Much of the debate revolving around the ASF concerns unspoken expectations - what should / can ASF provide emerging projects. As Gianugo puts it > The actual community building is however a task for the project itself: the > ASF isn't Midas and won't be able to > turn an unattractive project into sexy stuff that gathers time and > enthusiasm from volunteers. IMHO, the ASF provides the structure - based on years of experience - and infrastructure to support such communities. I think all open-source projects want to succeed. There is always some hidden hope that the ASF's Midas touch will lead to a stream of new developers contributing to this success. I think in the ASF the focus is on doing things the "Apache" way as a means of creating this community. Although ASF can provide guidance based upon what has been successful in other Apache projects, it can't be expected to do the grunt work for all its projects. We could expect more "lessons learned" from other ASF projects coming from the mentors but the actual application of these ideas has to come from us. Speaking of grunt work, we should probably be considering what to do about the necessity of rewriting the ESME codebase as David and Erik describe. We can have the best wiki in the ASF but ESME is a software project and without a solid code base we aren't going to get very far. D. On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Vassil Dichev wrote: > Without trying to get into David's mind, I'd like to point out that > David's blog post was more of a reaction to defend the Rails > community. I must say it's possible to get the point across even > without the unfortunate comparison with the ASF. The point is this: > it's hard writing exceptional software. I think you both agree on one > count: even guidance and support don't guarantee a groundbreaking > software project. If success was easy to reproduce, someone would have > discovered a way of generating groundbreaking software projects on a > mass scale. > > Now I don't think that a software project has to be groundbreaking to > be useful. I have no illusions that ESME is destined to be as > groundbreaking as e.g. Rails. I still hope it has the chance to be > useful. > > With that said, I hope that any heated arguments originating from the > Rails scandal are over soon, because there are probably no two people > who agree on which software is useful or groundbreaking. And the time > and effort spent in a discussion like this could be spent creating > software. > > Vassil > --0016364d2597756a510468fea1c0--