Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.162.179 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=gCDInAgKZhYti/xz71gPu1usGxBMUNLqDTmEPLyFcWeKqJHMiQ6PrCMpNhE1fRM4XO6sxf/VKYNc6PD1buzHvJFLQnVuDv7tfpOyENqIQXrcS/BEb2WyKWxOY6lAL/2LVRLkB2OgIuvlBkXX3FhVc3nZzBMcrhZ3KFIfWDVO9SE=
Message-ID: <f470f68e0803261428h18f15d12i28e351dc8a5b3125@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:28:40 +0000
From: "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re:
 [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
In-Reply-To: <9C07F03E-F99B-4439-99BA-83A37BB62D52@SUN.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <a21e8c210803240534g37ce41e6g75bc9c98075c115@mail.gmail.com>
	 <47E8179C.60104@redhat.com> <47E81BC0.3040706@gmail.com>
	 <47E829CC.8020202@redhat.com>
	 <c68e39170803250922r71ddeb2se818ab020fd73f9b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <129a14790803250938h1063d807p49de4b99b5a782a7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <129a14790803250944w507b643al834302495a3d101f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <c68e39170803250953h3f65b82du683c7fc8746632af@mail.gmail.com>
	 <a21e8c210803251511h5d176b12yc3a6f777e69b7cb6@mail.gmail.com>
	 <9C07F03E-F99B-4439-99BA-83A37BB62D52@SUN.com>

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:42 AM, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
> Hi Rupert,
>
>  This statement convinces me that you are an independent committer on
>  the project. I think it would be good for everyone on the qpid project
>  who consider themselves to be independent to post a similar statement.

+1

>  I'd probably go further, and ask that the statements be included in
>  the "who we are" section of the public qpid incubator project site.

as someone who's http://jakarta.apache.org/site/whoweare.html has for
many years consisted of my code signing key, i would feel a little
hypocritical simply adding a +1 to this ;-)

i can understand the reluctance to add employment details but it
doesn't have to be a dayjob CV if that's uncomfortable. this would
help to IPMC to be able to draw on useful information without this
rather interrogative process...

>  I think this would go a long way toward making the incubator pmc
>  members more comfortable about the diversity of the project.

+1

>  I understand that some consulting contracts have explicit clauses that
>  require that the consultant *not* publicize their working
>  relationships with clients. But I think that it's possible for qpid
>  committers to make statements similar to Rupert's below, to the effect
>  that even though they might have worked on a project that used qpid,
>  or were at some point paid to work on qpid, that their current
>  contributions and activities are on their own nickel.

+1

it's great to hear from the other committers

> And I hope that
>  Rupert doesn't get into trouble with JPMC over this disclosure.

+1

in the end, apache has no way to objectively judge a private
contractual relatioship. all that can be done is to ask that
committers state how independent they consider themselves and trust
that public opinion and personal reputation will provide strong enough
to convince people to be truthful.

- robert

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