[DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Hadrian Zbarcea
Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and
hard-core Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny
and they believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have
it's own awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start
a vote to graduate as TLP.

Thoughts?
Hadrian


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

christopher.l.shannon
Would Artemis need to go through the incubator process to make this happen
or could it immediately become its own TLP if that was agreed upon?

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and hard-core
> Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny and they
> believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have it's own
> awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start a vote to
> graduate as TLP.
>
> Thoughts?
> Hadrian
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

John D. Ament-2
The board receives agenda items to create a new TLP.  I'm not sure that
"graduation" is the right term, but more effectively "there is now a
project, which will have resources transferred to it from the ActiveMQ
project."

Personally, while I'm usually the biggest one pushing for open and honest
communication; I think you should discuss on your private@ list first. It
will give you some time to think about the over arching issues (technical,
procedural, interpersonal, etc) that are driving some of these and figure
out if there's a middle ground that can be established.  Before moving
forward with any of these approaches, it is best to figure out if the
problems can be solved by the PMC without separating the project.

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:20 PM Christopher Shannon <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Would Artemis need to go through the incubator process to make this happen
> or could it immediately become its own TLP if that was agreed upon?
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and
> hard-core
> > Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny and they
> > believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have it's own
> > awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start a vote to
> > graduate as TLP.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > Hadrian
> >
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Hadrian Zbarcea
In reply to this post by christopher.l.shannon
No, no incubation. Just graduates as TLP. There would be a discussion to
choose the new PMC and nominated chair. Resolution gets submitted to the
board which ratifies it at the board meeting and... that's it. Freedom.

I have a hunch that all the -1s would be in favor of such a proposal.
Problem solved.

Hadrian


On 12/06/2017 10:19 PM, Christopher Shannon wrote:

> Would Artemis need to go through the incubator process to make this happen
> or could it immediately become its own TLP if that was agreed upon?
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and hard-core
>> Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny and they
>> believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have it's own
>> awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start a vote to
>> graduate as TLP.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> Hadrian
>>
>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Hadrian Zbarcea
In reply to this post by John D. Ament-2
What am I saying? There  you have the authority in the field :).

John, the projects are in fact separated, Artemis is actually the
donated HornetQ project. It's not like 2 factions don't agree on the
future of one project. It's more like some not buying into the idea of
ActiveMQ being switched to HornetQ/Artemis with a version switch without
feature parity and reasonable adoption. And this proposal not even being
the first of its kind.

This way Artemis has the freedom to be as little or as much compatible
with ActiveMQ. No misrepresentation explicit or implied.

I am completely neutral to the appropriate forum to have the discussion,
but here one could get input from a larger audience.

Hadrian


On 12/06/2017 10:29 PM, John D. Ament wrote:

> The board receives agenda items to create a new TLP.  I'm not sure that
> "graduation" is the right term, but more effectively "there is now a
> project, which will have resources transferred to it from the ActiveMQ
> project."
>
> Personally, while I'm usually the biggest one pushing for open and honest
> communication; I think you should discuss on your private@ list first. It
> will give you some time to think about the over arching issues (technical,
> procedural, interpersonal, etc) that are driving some of these and figure
> out if there's a middle ground that can be established.  Before moving
> forward with any of these approaches, it is best to figure out if the
> problems can be solved by the PMC without separating the project.
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:20 PM Christopher Shannon <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Would Artemis need to go through the incubator process to make this happen
>> or could it immediately become its own TLP if that was agreed upon?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and
>> hard-core
>>> Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny and they
>>> believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have it's own
>>> awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start a vote to
>>> graduate as TLP.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

clebertsuconic
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:
> What am I saying? There  you have the authority in the field :).
>
> John, the projects are in fact separated, Artemis is actually the donated
> HornetQ project. It's not like 2 factions don't agree on the future of one
> project.

You are implying your opinion here as everybody's. I would like to
listen everybody's opinion before you tell what is everybody's
opinion.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Hadrian Zbarcea
Clebert, I'd suggest you don't go there.

I do not imply, I state (facts or opinions). I do not represent other
people's opinion, just my own. I am stating that Artemis is the
evolution of the HornetQ donation to the ASF by RH. ActiveMQ has
completely different origins.

As such, I was referring to other situations in the ASF's history (which
you my not be aware of) when 2 factions in the community could not agree
on the future of that one project. The result was some kind of fork.
That does not apply here, ActiveMQ 5 and Artemis are 2 different
projects. What facts are you disputing?

This discussion is about Artemis graduation that I believe would resolve
the current conundrum.

Stay on topic and cool down with the creative interpretations. Read
multiple times what has been written if necessary.

Cheers,
Hadrian


On 12/06/2017 10:58 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> What am I saying? There  you have the authority in the field :).
>>
>> John, the projects are in fact separated, Artemis is actually the donated
>> HornetQ project. It's not like 2 factions don't agree on the future of one
>> project.
>
> You are implying your opinion here as everybody's. I would like to
> listen everybody's opinion before you tell what is everybody's
> opinion.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

MichaelAndrePearce
I think having a divorce should be the last thing / option.

Maybe some counselling first ( Bruce is doing a good job here I think), I'm sure as a community it can be worked out, it be a shame for such a break up.





Sent from my iPad

> On 7 Dec 2017, at 04:20, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Clebert, I'd suggest you don't go there.
>
> I do not imply, I state (facts or opinions). I do not represent other people's opinion, just my own. I am stating that Artemis is the evolution of the HornetQ donation to the ASF by RH. ActiveMQ has completely different origins.
>
> As such, I was referring to other situations in the ASF's history (which you my not be aware of) when 2 factions in the community could not agree on the future of that one project. The result was some kind of fork. That does not apply here, ActiveMQ 5 and Artemis are 2 different projects. What facts are you disputing?
>
> This discussion is about Artemis graduation that I believe would resolve the current conundrum.
>
> Stay on topic and cool down with the creative interpretations. Read multiple times what has been written if necessary.
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
>
>> On 12/06/2017 10:58 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> What am I saying? There  you have the authority in the field :).
>>>
>>> John, the projects are in fact separated, Artemis is actually the donated
>>> HornetQ project. It's not like 2 factions don't agree on the future of one
>>> project.
>> You are implying your opinion here as everybody's. I would like to
>> listen everybody's opinion before you tell what is everybody's
>> opinion.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

gtully
In reply to this post by Hadrian Zbarcea
I don't agree with the premise of this discussion at all. It seems to be
born out of a your replies to your self in an echo chamber.

What are the adverse consequences in providing a robust migration path for
5.x users to activemq 6 *within* the ActiveMQ project?

The preceding vote did not have an implicit "now" in the title, it was
future focused.
In hind sight the title could have been:

 "When it's ready, Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6"

I think there is consensus forming around that.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 at 02:05 Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and
> hard-core Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny
> and they believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have
> it's own awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start
> a vote to graduate as TLP.
>
> Thoughts?
> Hadrian
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Martyn Taylor
-1.  I'm not even going to add weight to this discussion by giving a
reason.  I find the thread a ridiculous reaction to the vote email, in it
there are more inaccurate claims of the opinions of members of the
community.

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Gary Tully <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't agree with the premise of this discussion at all. It seems to be
> born out of a your replies to your self in an echo chamber.
>
> What are the adverse consequences in providing a robust migration path for
> 5.x users to activemq 6 *within* the ActiveMQ project?
>
> The preceding vote did not have an implicit "now" in the title, it was
> future focused.
> In hind sight the title could have been:
>
>  "When it's ready, Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6"
>
> I think there is consensus forming around that.
>
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 at 02:05 Hadrian Zbarcea <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Since Artemis has a kernel of developers had a few releases, and
> > hard-core Artemis believers want to be in control of their own destiny
> > and they believe the project can be sustained on its own merits and have
> > it's own awesome site, I propose that Artemis form its own PMC and start
> > a vote to graduate as TLP.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > Hadrian
> >
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

jgenender
I'm 0 on this.  Hadrian makes a very valid point and it opens up some
interesting thoughts.

I'm +1 for Artemis becoming a top level project because yes, based on the
infighting, etc, it may be best that it forms its own living/breathing
community.  I am personally exhausted from the fighting.  If Artemis is the
next generation MQ, it doesn't need ActiveMQ's community as it should easily
be able to stand on its own 2 feet.  There are a lot of positives and for
those who have issues with the people providing oversight on this project
now, this provides a clean slate and they can build that oversight from
those who beat to the same drum.

I'm -1 because I did vote to bring it in and I want to see it succeed and be
a part of its community.  Its a cool broker.  Not to mention I do have a
wee-bit of code I contributed to it.

+1 + -1 = 0

Jeff



--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Matt Pavlovich-2
In reply to this post by gtully
On 12/7/17 5:28 AM, Gary Tully wrote:
> I don't agree with the premise of this discussion at all. It seems to be
> born out of a your replies to your self in an echo chamber.

Agree

> What are the adverse consequences in providing a robust migration path for
> 5.x users to activemq 6 *within* the ActiveMQ project?
>
> The preceding vote did not have an implicit "now" in the title, it was
> future focused.
> In hind sight the title could have been:
>
>   "When it's ready, Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6"
>
> I think there is consensus forming around that.
Agree. For those voting -1 on the "when its ready.." let's be
constructive. Provide path forward.

-Matt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

jgenender
Matt Pavlovich-2 wrote
>>   "When it's ready, Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6"
>>
>> I think there is consensus forming around that.
> Agree. For those voting -1 on the "when its ready.." let's be
> constructive. Provide path forward.

We did.  Read the thread.



--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

artnaseef
In reply to this post by Matt Pavlovich-2
I don't know about you guys - but I often feel like I'm arguing with myself
in an echo chamber when trying to find a way to move these discussions
forward.

:-)




--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

Matt Pavlovich-2
My latest theory is that I'm reading messages in 'threaded' view, and
others in timeline.. probably half the problem.. lol


On 12/7/17 11:38 AM, artnaseef wrote:

> I don't know about you guys - but I often feel like I'm arguing with myself
> in an echo chamber when trying to find a way to move these discussions
> forward.
>
> :-)
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html