incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davanum Srinivas <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] accept donation of a business process engine into the ServiceMix project
Date Fri, 03 Feb 2006 13:02:33 GMT
James,

There are 2 problems:
- As a Geronimo PMC member i feel a BPEL implemenation is out-of-scope
of what i voted for when i +1'ed incubation for ServiceMix. I don't
like what's happening and the way you are doing it.
- Secondly, there just isnt enough information to make a decision one
way or another. A proposal would clear up things like what the
"supposed" community thinks about a road map for the future say "BPEL
2.0"

So, bottom line, Please draw up a new proposal for a separate project.
Yes, of course ServiceMix can embed it and use it just like it does
XFire or Axis or XBean. No one is saying you can't distribute a BPEL
enabled ServiceMix. It deserves good attention and TLC, which Agila is
not getting, So a fresh start would enable more people to converge and
work on. So please *STOP* the vote and work on a proposal and post it.

thanks,
dims

On 2/3/06, James Strachan <james.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2006, at 11:33, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> > James Strachan wrote:
> >> On 3 Feb 2006, at 09:18, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> >>
> >>> Absolutely -1: The first time I ever saw any of this topic was
> >>> Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:20:32 -0700  (Thu, 01:20 LKT)
> >>> and now at
> >>> Thu, 2 Feb 2006 16:22:28 +0000  (22:22 LKT)
> >>> you want to have a vote on it? You've GOT to be kidding.
> >>
> >> I called a vote to see what people thought about it, particularly the
> >> project sponsor, the geronimo PMC.
> >
> > You don't vote to get opinions or discussion.  The actual
> > text being voted on was:
> >
> >     "accept the donation into the ServiceMix incubator project"
>
> The contributors want to donate their code to the ServiceMix
> community and all indications are that the ServiceMix community want
> to accept the code and want to work with the contributors; so I
> thought it was right to seek approval for this course of action from
> the sponsor PMC. Bear in mind we are still in the incubator anyway so
> there is plenty of time for folks to review the code, watch the
> community in action, get involved and participate before attempts are
> made to leave the incubator.
>
>
> >>> The idea of incubation is that the project is still not
> >>> a part of Apache and hasn't quite become a meritocracy etc..
> >>
> >> I understand that, which is why we are asking for the sponsor, the
> >> Geronimo PMC to vote.
> >
> > That's very convoluted to my mind, although it *is* currently
> > early in the morning here.
>
> :)
>
> > A package gets accepted as a podling,
> > and then later the sponsor, a group external to the podling,
> > decides to add more to it?
>
> Well no-one has decided yet, that's why we're voting ;) - but the
> point of the vote was to ask the sponsor PMC to allow the podling to
> be able to accept a code donation as well as canvassing the
> ServiceMix community to see if they'd like to accept it. (Maybe this
> caused some confusion having just 1 vote?)
>
>
> > Admittedly the podling itself isn't
> > allowed to make the decision, but that's still an odd scenario.
> > Regardless of whether it has happened before, it's clearly
> > an exception rather than the rule, and therefore subject to
> > scrutiny.
>
> OK. But I thought it was fine for issues to come up in votes, for
> them to be debated & addressed and then later for action to be taken?
> Its certainly been my impression of how things tend to work on all
> the apache projects i've been on - apologies if I'm mistaken.
>
>
> >>> The way this particular potential donation has been handled proves
> >>> without a shadow of a doubt that this project (ServiceMix) is not
> >>> running The Apache Way.
> >> I don't see how the project is not following the Apache Way. I find
> >> this comment particularly puzzling as you voted yourself in to be a
> >> mentor of the ServiceMix project.
> >
> > And I find it particularly troubling that a mentor of the
> > podling in question is so strongly opposed to this tack.
>
> My objection was more to that sentence - of labelling the ServiceMix
> project as not following the Apache Way when the main issue in
> Sanjiva's mail to me seems to be my handling of the vote. i.e. I'd
> much rather people say "bad James, you're not acting in an Apache
> Way" or "you really messed up that vote" than to make, what feels at
> least, a little derogatory comment about the entire ServiceMix
> community as a whole which has been working very hard to follow the
> incubation process and the Apache Way.
>
>
> > If Sanjiva, a mentor of ServiceMix and therefore supposedly
> > closer to it than most.. if *he* thinks there's something
> > awkward about the way this is being handled, then I think
> > attention should be paid to him.
>
> Absolutely; we're all paying attention to everyone's comment on this
> issue.
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>
>


--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message