incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason van Zyl <jvan...@sonatype.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Ace
Date Mon, 06 Apr 2009 03:00:38 GMT
There's nothing for me to be insincere about. Beyond providing some  
context for most people that don't know I am not going to expend any  
effort on implementation, but I would be happy to talk about the  
problem of provisioning which is why I gave a +1. So it's in the hands  
of those that care. If folks want to do the work then I do feel they  
should go for it.

I saw the proposal, someone mentioned p2, I use p2, I gave my opinion.

I would only ask that these proposals have a little more clarity,  
context, and honesty. Everyone seems to know exactly what I'm talking  
about with respect to p2 yet none of that is reflected in the  
proposal. It's a little like dealing with patent lawyers: "this system  
uses 4 bits, not 5 so it's completely different, lightweight and  
orthogonal."

A little background on OBR and p2 could only be helpful for people  
trying to understand the landscape while reading the proposal.

As for my agenda, there's nothing that isn't public. Sonatype has  
implemented a product that supports p2. We actually haven't done any  
work on p2 itself yet but we probably will in the next 6 months. We  
effectively created a product in a very short period of time and it  
was at the behest of our clients. So I would relay that to people: p2  
is a viable platform. That said insofar as Nexus goes it would take a  
week to implement support for a completely different system so we're  
not wedded to p2 as a business model. If p2 disappeared tomorrow it's  
not of any particular consequence to Sonatype so talking about p2 is  
nothing more then me being a very happy user. p2 just happens to be  
what our clients are asking for so we created support for it on the  
server side. I recommend p2 to folks looking at provisioning. All  
publicly stated. If that's an agenda then I guess I have one.

I think p2 is solid and pretty advanced and if I am genuinely in  
anything it's asking, for your sakes, not to make something that no  
one is going to use. That's my agenda if I have one. You've got IBM  
and Redhat and a slew of other companies (lots of small ones too)  
working on it, it's all there to look at and the code is not terribly  
hard to work with. You could make any provisioning system with it  
including anything you're talking about here.

If you guys want to work on something else, seriously, go for. I'd be  
happy to share use cases as we've dealt with 5 all the way up to 3k  
machines.

On 5-Apr-09, at 6:40 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Jason van Zyl <jvanzyl@sonatype.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> As I said in the previous email if you want to make a competing  
>> system
>> that's fine. But don't couch the proposal as something that's new  
>> and hasn't
>> been addressed elsewhere because it has.
>
> Jason,
> I don't know why you got so worked up over this proposal. You seldom
> raise your concerns here, and when you do it this "loudly", it sounds
> like you are on an agenda, and with your recent commitment to Eclipse
> Foundation, such suspicion is yet stronger. I will assume that is not
> the case. And in the end, you make a turn-around and say "You guys
> should go for it.". I hope that is sincere.
>
> It is barely the first time a project is overlapping or competing with
> a known large project. And whether or not P2 covers the same space or
> not is also fairly irrelevant.
>
> As for the argument; "95% will use Eclipse..." Even if that would be
> true, it is irrelevant and you if anyone should know that. Ant had
> close to 100% of users in Java-land and won "Best Software" kind of
> awards all over the place, by the time you started Maven. Should that
> argument have stopped you from trying? Do you regret that Maven
> started?
>
> I also find OBR vs P2 argumentation being a non-issue. Ace can in
> principle work with both, if the community choose to support P2. IMHO,
> P2 is fairly "heavy" and not suitable for many people. And I don't
> like to live in the world with 'single choice', where a faceless mob
> has made my choice out of numbers alone. I happen to choose the
> technology that best suits _my_ needs. Some years ago that was Maven
> over Ant, now it is IDEA over Eclipse, Jetty over Tomcat for tests,
> and so on...
>
>
> Cheers
> -- 
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
>
> I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
> I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------

believe nothing, no matter where you read it,
or who has said it,
not even if i have said it,
unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense.

  -- Buddha


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


Mime
View raw message