incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Incubation status
Date Sun, 08 Dec 2013 17:47:08 GMT
Just a random thing that might help wave in a small way;
StackOverflow still only has a tag for "Google-Wave". Surely this should be
changed? or someone with a high enough rank create a new tag? Just try to
help as much as possible greese the wheels for people finding wave related
technical info.

~~~
Thomas & Bertines online review show:
http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :)


On 7 December 2013 23:18, John Blossom <jblossom@gmail.com> wrote:

> Good points, Bruno, I think that you summed it up very well. I'd only add
> that in theory the broader Apache community should act as a draw for the
> project, but the social infrastructure for Apache doesn't seem to amplify
> that value for Wave. A more flexible approach might help to get a core
> group of people more jazzed about making a core capability take off. I can
> see where at some point folding back into Apache might be a reasonable
> option, and I was hopeful that the Apache framework would help to
> accelerate team-building, and the core Apache people we've dealt with are
> great, but somehow the combination of culture and collaboration tools
> hasn't hit the mark for Wave.
>
> Thanks, John
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) <
> stenyak@stenyak.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all, sorry to reply this late, but here's my point of view.
> >
> >
> > Legal point of view:
> > From my understanding, being at Apache, and following its strict
> > policies, should in theory attract serious companies to invest money
> > into the project, being reassured that the legal risks are minimal.
> > Unfortunately, not much of the sort seems to have happened yet. I
> > personally think that, on the contrary, it has in part contributed to
> > wasting precious time. What I mean is that, I'd much rather have a
> > 50%-legally-sound and alive project, than a 99%-legally-sound but almost
> > dead project.
> > If the project had 10 people devoting their spare time, parallelizing
> > efforts in several planes (one of them the licensing issues), then maybe
> > it wouldn't be such a burden to keep up with those policies. But it
> > breaks my kernel to see the most valuable contributors having to deal
> > with random icon licensing stuff.
> > In this regard, my vote would be: in favour of leaving Apache.
> >
> > Social point of view:
> > The "Apache" name surely is known by many people. At least in the
> > developer community. This could more easily attract them to the project.
> > But given the total amount of project we have really working on the
> > project, I'm not sure whether the 'Apache' name is actually better than
> > simply having the code at github with actual p2p VCS capabilities.
> > For that, my vote would be neutral at best, and leaning towards leaving
> > Apache.
> >
> >
> > Technical point of view:
> > A big point for staying at Apache is that we have a big infrastructure
> > already in place: issue tracker, code repository, wiki, mailing list,
> > possibility to use virtual machines for free, etc.
> > However, that's also the problem: being provided and maintained by a
> > third party (from the point of view of our project), means there's no
> > flexibility as to what VCS we want to use (a read-only mirror at github
> > is missing the whole point about git), what communication medium to
> > officially use (the dogfooding argument), etc.
> > This is what I've had the closest (though scarce) experience with, and
> > in my case, I feel it has slowed me down, having to divert potential
> > coding time into non-important stuff. I don't know how much time, but
> > surely > 0.
> > For that, I'd vote in favour of leaving apache.
> >
> >
> >
> > All in all, and unless things can be done in a different way while still
> > staying at Apache, my opinion is that we would prolly be better off
> > outside Apache at this point (in the future maybe it'd be better to go
> > back, but I don't see how things could get worse by leaving Apache now).
> >
> >
> > On 11/28/13 11:02, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> > > I believe it makes sense to discuss if the incubator is the right
> place.
> > > Incubation has a specific goal: forming a team which can do releases
> > > and is - in a way - active.
> > >
> > > I see there is little activity at all. The only person i have seen
> > > working on the codebase recently was Ali.
> > > He also was the release manager of package which had trouble to
> > > receive the necessary votes from its own team.
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message