incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Davanum Srinivas" <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator
Date Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:19:38 GMT
Alan,

There is something going on that i can't really put my finger on.

- The large # of committers who don't really commit
- The presence of ActiveCluster/ActiveIO which were separate projects
in codehaus (is the active cluster code inside the milestone? i don't
see a separate jar).
- The constant unrelenting pressure to make activemq part of Geronimo
so that all the 27 people become Geronimo committers
- The lack of discussion on say the OpenWire stuff. I see one status
email[1] that's it. the other 26 people don't seem to have any opinion
on it. Are people talking offline?
- People commenting on the silence on the dev mailing list.[2]

Somehow all of this is making me queasy...

[1] - http://www.mail-archive.com/activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg00138.html
[2] - http://www.mail-archive.com/activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg00099.html

thanks,
dims

On 3/15/06, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> >
> >
> >> This is not a vote, but simply a discussion about the graduation of
> >> ActiveMQ from the Incubator.
> >>
> >
> > Personally, I do not consider ActiveMQ ready.  And I do believe that it
> > should be targeting TLP status.  It has its own community, is separately
> > releasable and useable in many projects, not just as part of a J2EE server,
> > and would do better as its own TLP.  To reiterate, these are my views.  The
> > Incubator PMC may share or differ in its collective view.
> >
> > Keep in mind that I am not saying anything negative about ActiveMQ.  I like
> > the project.  I have had quite constructive discussions with members of the
> > project about possibly using the project.  It simply has a way to go before
> > it is ready as a TLP.  For that matter, as others have pointed out, it still
> > has some way to go in migrating infrastructure, of which JIRA is only one
> > issue, and is being addressed.
> >
> > Generally speaking, I concur with the point made by others: new projects
> > should learn from the mistakes of others, not emulate them.
> >
> >
>
> I only see infrastructure issues in your list of concerns that would
> prevent the graduation of ActiveMQ.
>
> You express an opinion that it should be a TLP but mention that it has a
> long way to go before it's ready for that.  Can you enumerate what
> remains, aside from the infrastructure issues, to be done to graduate as
> a TLP?  If AMQ has less inspiring aspirations and was to initially land
> as a sub-project, can you enumerate what remains to be done to graduate?
>
> IMO, aside from the infrastructure issues, AMQ is good to go as a
> sub-project.  It should start there and if it's worthy enough, evolve
> into a TLP.  I see no good reason for it to stay in the incubator at
> this time.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>


--
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