incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <cctriel...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Blaze and Openness of Standards (was Re: [Proposal] Blaze)
Date Thu, 03 Aug 2006 16:00:02 GMT

That is acceptable, and very reasonable, thank you
Carl.

Brian McCallister wrote:
> I'm quite happy to have it come to a vote, but I would like to see the 
> specification issue laid to rest before graduation :-)
>
> -Brian
>
> On Aug 2, 2006, at 10:26 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>
>> Brian,
>>
>> As the Champion for this proposal, I'd like to move this on to a vote.
>> I just read all the related posts one more time, and I believe your
>> concern below is the only one that hasn't been directly addressed (if
>> I'm wrong about this, someone speak up).  So, I want to offer my
>> thoughts on it and you can tell me if there is more to discuss before
>> voting.  Otherwise, I'll probably start the vote within the next 12-24
>> hours, unless there are other concerns that pop up.
>>
>> See below.
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>> On 7/31/06, Brian McCallister <brianm@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I am still uncomfortable with the AMQP spec ownership and process for
>>> two reasons.
>>>
>>> 1) The pessimistic and defensive one: Entering incubation at Apache
>>> implies Apache's endorsement. This is not what we mean, but it is how
>>> the world will react. This endorsement is partly the point of the
>>> proposal -- getting the ASF behind AMQP will give it a boost, and
>>> incubation is still not well understood, even inside the ASF :-(
>>
>> I don't see this as being different from any proposal that comes to
>> the Incubator that wants to implement something other than a broadly
>> accepted standard.  We often get proposals for things based on some
>> vendor's previously proprietary software.  Sometimes the proposal
>> includes committers employed by a couple independent companies; in
>> this case, there are 3-4 employers.  I definitely think we need to be
>> careful about these projects, which is why I've always been a big fan
>> of strong incubator branding.
>>
>> However, I do completely understand your concern about the ASF giving
>> AMQP a boost too early.  So, while there may be some boost from it
>> getting incubation status at Apache (which we have to weigh up with
>> all new projects), your concern is the same thing that makes me
>> hesitant to advocate that the ASF should join the AMQP spec group.  It
>> would provide easy participation for ASF committers to the spec work,
>> but it could also be a big endorsement that I don't think we should be
>> giving to this group at this stage.  I get the impression that Carl
>> and the others would be happy to have the ASF; I'm just not sure it's
>> the right decision for us...but none of this makes me thing this
>> project should not be accepted for incubation.  Do you feel
>> differently?
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>


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


Mime
View raw message