[DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

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

[DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

Chris Mattmann
Hi James,


(note [DISCUSS] in front of [VOTE] for clear delineation)

>
>I think this thread is a perfect example really. Just re-read the mails
>above if anyone needs more proof.
>
>A vote starts to move some old crusty code for a pretty crappy console
>(which the main developers and maintainers have kinda given up on) to a
>different directory in subversion on a different release cycle; so a
>community can either form around it or it can eventually be moved to the
>Attic. Queue lots of the usual attacks on Red Hat folks from the usual
>suspects from Talend & Savoir who every chance they get spew bile,
>personal
>attacks, conspiracy theories, question our integrity, professionalism and
>motives. Its gone way beyond being irritating and offensive really; its
>now
>becoming downright hilarious. You go guys! Keep up the amazing work, am
>sure ActiveMQ developers and users are really loving this stuff!
>
>In comparison - we've had no bullshit at all on github. Its a breath of
>fresh air, amazing tooling and its great fun. There's a very low barrier
>to
>entry and we seem to already have got more contributions at hawtio from
>folks than we've ever got for the ActiveMQ web console.

I'm sorry -- are you suggesting that simply because you are on Github that
you don't get community flare ups?

>
>Incidentally I don't know if you've noticed; Apache isn't the centre of
>the
>universe. There's some amazing opens source going on elsewhere - mostly on
>github - e.g. docker, angularjs and vertx to name but 3 off the top of my
>head are huge game changers.

And in case you haven't noticed Apache still has a LOT of really cool stuff
going on too. And furthermore in case you haven't noticed you are what
seems
to be a member of the Apache Software Foundation, at least looking here:

http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#activemq


By that bold portion of your name. So regardless of particulars about
other discussions, this discussion needs to arrive at a remedy by the
next board meeting that solves the blatant abuse of this
PMC of Apache brands, and I'd appreciate you more carefully teetering on
your *Apache* hat which you are supposed to wear here.

Cheers,
Chris


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

Chris Mattmann
Dan is correct.

hawt.io being part of Apache is a separate and orthogonal discussion

to what *this discussion* needs to arrive at a suitable conclusion for -
that is currently the *Apache ActiveMQ* Project Management Committee (PMC)
is blatantly abusing Apache's brands by having released a version of
the Apache ActiveMQ software product containing a web component that does
nothing to credit the Apache Software Foundation as the home for the
development of the Apache ActiveMQ project. That is ground zero for
what needs addressing and why I took an action from the Board meeting
to investigate and fuel a resolution to this as an Apache Director.

The February 2014 board meeting needs a solution to this. Looks like
the current VOTE is about:

1. Creating a sub project of Apache ActiveMQ for the web console

Separate from this, I believe Hadrian reverted hawt.io out of the current
trunk per
a separate thread and there is discussion of a release of the Apache
ActiveMQ product out of trunk (correct?) that simply contains the old
console but also includes
all of the other goodies and bells and whistles of the latest Apache Active
MQ product simply sans hawt.io.

Hadrian's revert at this point and the release that should follow will
address the concern of branding and trademarks.

The Apache ActiveMQ community seems to have more to deal with beyond that.
The biggest question will be what to do with the web console. If the above
VOTE (this VOTE) succeeds and the console is in its own sub-product (simply
another directory in SVN with potentially a different release cycle as it
was put),
the answer at that point isn't simply shoving hawt.io back in sans some
big time
branding. And even beyond that branding, realize that you have at least
one board
member here who will be watching the way this discussion plays out. Dan
brought up
some good points (as have others including Rob) about incorporating third
party
software and the technical nooks and crannies necessary to make that
happen.
As has been pointed out so far, many of the folks on the Apache ActiveMQ
PMC seem to have a foot on the development of the hawt.io system
externally and
thus need to carefully teeter their Apache hat (the one I care about) and
their
other hats ($dayjob; $funjob; etc.) Introducing dependencies upon
externally
stewarded projects where Apache PMC members are part of that project will
*always*
introduce conspiracy theories -- so be prepared for them -- and be
prepared for
scrutiny that will ensue. Also you will get people like me whose primary
interest is in
the ASF and Apache being around for the next 50 years wondering, "if
hawt.io is so
bad ass, and half of the people on the Apache ActiveMQ PMC are developing
it, why the
crap aren't they doing it here at the ASF or improving what's here at the
ASF?"

To get back on point -- I'm looking for the PMC to arrive at a solution
that
addresses the *current* branding and trademark problem. Seems like it's
close
to being there with Hadrian's revert and impending release. My suggestion:
arrive
at that soon with something you can point to or that I can point to during
the
board meeting. Then, work these community issues and arrive at some
consensus and
I encourage everyone around here to get back to developing code and having
fun
so that the ASF is fun to you if you are hanging around here.

Cheers,
Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Kulp <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, January 31, 2014 9:12 AM
To: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

>
>On Jan 30, 2014, at 5:46 PM, Robert Davies <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 30 Jan 2014, at 22:07, jgenender <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> A lot of those names seem to jump out as being AMQ committers.  I
>>>assume you
>>> would know, or perhaps one of the other hawt.io contributors would
>>>like to
>>> chime in?
>>
>> There¹s more committers there who aren¹t involved with Apache, but
>>really its their community - they can choose where their code lives.
>
>I agree with Rob on this part.   We have to recognize that Apache is not
>the best fit for every project.   Apache has certain restrictions that it
>places on projects.   Things like consensus driven development,
>diversity, no benevolent dictators, simple things like voting on
>releases, open discussions, etcŠ.   However, Apache also has certain
>benefits such as the name association, legal protections, history of long
>lived projects (thanks to the diversity and such), even things like build
>systems.    Each projects needs to decide if the good parts out weigh the
>bad for them.  If they decide they don¹t, that is completely OK.  We¹re
>OK with that.
>
>However, if a project decides not to be part of the ASF, then they are
>not part of the ASF, period.   That means the ASF cannot be used to
>promote it and ASF cannot be used to drive developers to it unless it¹s
>completely done in a fair and unbiased manner.    The ASF projects cannot
>³endorse² them as the best thing since sliced bread.   It cannot be
>pushed on the users as the only way to do something.  EtcŠ     We thank
>them for doing a great job building on top of the work we do here and
>then we get back to doing the work we need to do here.
>
>As far as hawt.io is concerned, if they want to keep things out of AMQ,
>that is perfectly fine.   They are entitled to that as they are the ones
>working on it.   I wish them all the best of luck.   It is nice
>technology.    However, I also ask them to please stop pushing it within
>Apache.
>
>Folks: can we please let this drop?  Trying to push an external community
>into doing something they don¹t want to do IS a bit antagonistic.  A
>polite ³would you consider moving XYZ to AMQ?² question to THEIR mailing
>list could be appropriate, but if they say no (on their list), then it¹s
>pretty much done.   If they don¹t want it part of Apache, then we say
>thanks for considering it and then we move on with what we need to do
>here and pretty much ignore them.   If THEY keep coming back to our list
>and trying to push there stuff on us, that¹s different.  Politely tell
>them to go away and then get back to doing what we need to do here.
>
>
>Dan
>
>
>
>
>> Apache isn¹t exactly the best place for innovation. Just look at this
>>whole thread, imagine trying to create a UI based around consensus - it
>>wouldn¹t happen - so it doesn¹t seem odd to me that the ASF wouldn't be
>>there first choice.
>>
>>>
>>> Also, if you are not part of the hawt.io community, whats up with your
>>> signature?
>>
>> There¹s never been a great management console before that has been
>>under a permissive licence like the ASF - its a game changer. I¹m happy
>>to promote in any small way I can.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> rajdavies wrote
>>>> I¹m not a member of the hawtio community - but they were pretty clear
>>>>they
>>>> didn¹t feel the ASF was the best place to innovate and develop a UI.
>>>> <SNIP>
>>>> Rob Davies
>>>> ‹‹‹‹‹‹‹‹
>>>> Red Hat, Inc
>>>> http://hawt.io - #dontcha
>>>> Twitter: rajdavies
>>>> Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
>>>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>>http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Move-the-ActiveMQ-web-console
>>>-to-a-sub-project-tp4676877p4677102.html
>>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> Rob Davies
>> ‹‹‹‹‹‹‹‹
>> Red Hat, Inc
>> http://hawt.io - #dontcha
>> Twitter: rajdavies
>> Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>>
>
>--
>Daniel Kulp
>[hidden email] - http://dankulp.com/blog
>Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

rajdavies
In reply to this post by Chris Mattmann

>
>  the blatant abuse of this
> PMC of Apache brands,

Abuse of the Apache brands would be calling a product “Apache ESB” - a project that doesn’t exist at the ASF, but trying to get marketing through association with the Apache brand.
We (ActiveMQ PMC)  shipped a web console from another OS Apache Licence project.  Please explain the blatant abuse?


Rob Davies
————————
Red Hat, Inc
http://hawt.io - #dontcha
Twitter: rajdavies
Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

Chris Mattmann
Hi Rob,

I'm glad that's your definition of blatant abuse -- it's not my definition
at all.

My definition starts with a PMC that knowingly shipped a big front-facing
part of
its product that had links all over it to technical documents, youtube
videos, company
specific information and yet didn't have anything remotely resembling
Apache as a first
class citizen.

So yes, it's more than shipping a web console from another OS Apache
License project.
You (part of the Apache ActiveMQ PMC) help to ship an Apache endorsed
release that
didn't respect Apache IMO and got the attention of trademarks and the
Apache board.

Cheers,
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Davies <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, January 31, 2014 11:20 PM
To: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a
sub-project.

>
>>
>>  the blatant abuse of this
>> PMC of Apache brands,
>
>Abuse of the Apache brands would be calling a product ³Apache ESB² - a
>project that doesn¹t exist at the ASF, but trying to get marketing
>through association with the Apache brand.
>We (ActiveMQ PMC)  shipped a web console from another OS Apache Licence
>project.  Please explain the blatant abuse?
>
>
>Rob Davies
>‹‹‹‹‹‹‹‹
>Red Hat, Inc
>http://hawt.io - #dontcha
>Twitter: rajdavies
>Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
>ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

rajdavies
Chris,

On 1 Feb 2014, at 07:26, Chris Mattmann <[hidden email]> wrote:


> My definition starts with a PMC that knowingly shipped a big front-facing
> part of
> its product that had links all over it to technical documents, youtube
> videos, company
> specific information and yet didn't have anything remotely resembling
> Apache as a first
> class citizen.

>
> So yes, it's more than shipping a web console from another OS Apache
> License project.
> You (part of the Apache ActiveMQ PMC) help to ship an Apache endorsed
> release that
> didn't respect Apache IMO and got the attention of trademarks and the
> Apache board.

It wasn’t blatant, is wasn’t deliberate - ActiveMQ has a lot of committers and a large PMC. The reality is that there are only half a dozen committers who have been consistently active on the project and have written a very large proportion of the code. If you look at the committers who are active, there’s little cross over between them and committers on hawtio. A good indication of real activity on the PMC  is to look at who’s been voting for new committers or new releases  - its consistently 6 or 7 people - James Strachan isn’t on that list. That’s not a good thing for the project - but its natural for a mature project to fall into this pattern. There was a genuine intention to improve the ActiveMQ project by including a new console (along side the old one)  - that was clearly a mistake,  but it wasn’t a blatant attempt to circumvent the Apache brand.

There’s actually no branding policy which covers these situations - I’d be happy to help create one.


thanks,

Rob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

Chris Mattmann
Hi Rob,

-----Original Message-----

From: Robert Davies <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: <[hidden email]>
Date: Saturday, February 1, 2014 1:02 AM
To: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a
sub-project.

>Chris,
>
>On 1 Feb 2014, at 07:26, Chris Mattmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>> My definition starts with a PMC that knowingly shipped a big
>>front-facing
>> part of
>> its product that had links all over it to technical documents, youtube
>> videos, company
>> specific information and yet didn't have anything remotely resembling
>> Apache as a first
>> class citizen.
>
>>
>> So yes, it's more than shipping a web console from another OS Apache
>> License project.
>> You (part of the Apache ActiveMQ PMC) help to ship an Apache endorsed
>> release that
>> didn't respect Apache IMO and got the attention of trademarks and the
>> Apache board.
>
>It wasn¹t blatant, is wasn¹t deliberate - ActiveMQ has a lot of
>committers and a large PMC.

I'm hoping that's the case (that it wasn't blatant), but from what I've
seen so far the jury
is really out on that. Even statements from you that continue today
suggest to me that folks
were all very well aware that hawt.io was being incorporated into the
sources. hawt.io out of
the box does not respect Apache brands. I don't know how to put it any
clearer. However, let's
not pick on hawt.io. Guess what -- many external web components wouldn't
respect Apache brands
if we downright shipped them as part of our products. That's why we have
to do things like customize
them, skin or configure them, etc. Making the excuse that there's no
branding policy for situations
like this is a straw man and not correct (I'll get to that below).

As for its size ActiveMQ's PMC is ~42 people -- that is quite a few --
similar to projects
I've worked in including OODT, Hadoop, etc.


>The reality is that there are only half a dozen committers who have been
>consistently active on the project and have written a very large
>proportion of the code. If you look at the committers who are active,
>there¹s little cross over between them and committers on hawtio. A good
>indication of real activity on the PMC  is to look at who¹s been voting
>for new committers or new releases  - its consistently 6 or 7 people -
>James Strachan isn¹t on that list.

Thanks for the pointers. Having inactivity on the PMC is one thing (merit
at the ASF doesn't expire).
The PMC's responsibility is to make sure that the products it delivers and
ships as "Apache releases"
respect Apache brands. That's why we graduate projects out of the
Incubator. That's why we elect ASF "members"
who are supposed to know what's up and to ensure that the projects can
operate autonomously and in a decentralized
fashion so that the board doesn't have to come in and act like we're
centrally managing things. When board members
do step in, it's usually not with surgical precision -- it's with a
bazooka. In this case -- saying most of the
PMC is inactive and those that are active don't participate in hawt.io, so
that's why it's OK doesn't really
make me confident that this PMC knows how to manage an ASF product or set
of them which isn't a good thing.

I took an action from the ASF board meeting to ensure that the ActiveMQ
PMC corrects this situation in
which it's shipped a product that doesn't respect Apache brands. The
product I'm discussing is ActiveMQ -- it's
not hawt.io -- whether hawt.io respects Apache brands is a different thing
depending on the Apache software
it may or may not use -- I don't really care about that (Shane does though
as VP, Trademarks). What I care
about is that the ActiveMQ release included a sub component (hawt.io) that
needed skinning and tailoring
before being released. Without this tailoring we confuse our users who get
Apache ActiveMQ and scratch their
head why there are links to RedHat and YouTube on that web console and why
there is no mention prominently of Apache.

> That¹s not a good thing for the project - but its natural for a mature
>project to fall into this pattern. There was a genuine intention to
>improve the ActiveMQ project by including a new console (along side the
>old one)  - that was clearly a mistake,  but it wasn¹t a blatant attempt
>to circumvent the Apache brand.

You continue to say that -- great. Were you the one that issued the commit
to include hawt.io? If you weren't
I wouldn't speculate in general -- if you were the person to issue the
commit -- then I'll take your continuing
statement that it wasn't intentional to heart.

Whatever you or I believe is irrelevant though in the face of the very
real requirement that hawt.io as shipped
in Active ActiveMQ does not respect Apache brands.

>
>
>There¹s actually no branding policy which covers these situations - I¹d
>be happy to help create one.

Yes there is. It's called:

http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html#naming


This applies to the way we name our projects, to its websites and more
generally to the products we ship.
The way to look at it is -- first class citizens in our projects
(components, libraries, middle wares, web
UIs, etc.) need to respect our brands as much as the websites that we
steward and maintain about them and
as much as they are ultimately what the public associates in its head with
our products.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a trademarks person. But even I can make that
association. This is one of the litmus
tests of being a PMC member.

Cheers,
Chris


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

James Strachan-2
In reply to this post by Chris Mattmann
On 1 February 2014 06:56, Chris Mattmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi James,
>
>
> (note [DISCUSS] in front of [VOTE] for clear delineation)
>
> >
> >I think this thread is a perfect example really. Just re-read the mails
> >above if anyone needs more proof.
> >
> >A vote starts to move some old crusty code for a pretty crappy console
> >(which the main developers and maintainers have kinda given up on) to a
> >different directory in subversion on a different release cycle; so a
> >community can either form around it or it can eventually be moved to the
> >Attic. Queue lots of the usual attacks on Red Hat folks from the usual
> >suspects from Talend & Savoir who every chance they get spew bile,
> >personal
> >attacks, conspiracy theories, question our integrity, professionalism and
> >motives. Its gone way beyond being irritating and offensive really; its
> >now
> >becoming downright hilarious. You go guys! Keep up the amazing work, am
> >sure ActiveMQ developers and users are really loving this stuff!
> >
> >In comparison - we've had no bullshit at all on github. Its a breath of
> >fresh air, amazing tooling and its great fun. There's a very low barrier
> >to
> >entry and we seem to already have got more contributions at hawtio from
> >folks than we've ever got for the ActiveMQ web console.
>
> I'm sorry -- are you suggesting that simply because you are on Github that
> you don't get community flare ups?
>

I'm suggesting that at github, its pretty hard to run a smear campaign like
certain folks from Savoir & Talend have been doing against Fuse/Red Hat
folks here at Apache for some time. On github I've yet to see any personal
attacks, FUD, slander, conspiracy theories or innuendo yet. I've not even
seen a flare up either but I'm sure that'll happen one day.



> >Incidentally I don't know if you've noticed; Apache isn't the centre of
> >the
> >universe. There's some amazing opens source going on elsewhere - mostly on
> >github - e.g. docker, angularjs and vertx to name but 3 off the top of my
> >head are huge game changers.
>
> And in case you haven't noticed Apache still has a LOT of really cool stuff
> going on too.


Sure. Like I said though, its not the centre of the universe; there's cool
stuff all over the place. Apart from in the Hadoop ecosystem, most of the
cool stuff seems to be increasingly outside of Apache these days. If Apache
is so amazing I wonder why?

--
James
-------
Red Hat

Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Open Source Integration
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Move the ActiveMQ web-console to a sub-project.

jgenender
James Strachan-2 wrote
I'm suggesting that at github, its pretty hard to run a smear campaign like
certain folks from Savoir & Talend have been doing against Fuse/Red Hat
folks here at Apache for some time. On github I've yet to see any personal
attacks, FUD, slander, conspiracy theories or innuendo yet. I've not even
seen a flare up either but I'm sure that'll happen one day.
Oh cut the crap, Strachan.  The hand waving bullshit of a "smear" campaign is a joke. There is no "smear" campaign and nobody is "against" you.

You have community members here, Camel, Karaf, etc etc, who simply don't let you get away with your transgressions of pushing the limits of what it means to be a good Apache citizen.  There are countless complaints about misusing Apache trademarks, abusing the community, etc, all from your little corner of the world...  I challenge you to find such transgressions and complaints from "Savoir" or "Talend".  I don't blame RedHat.  I don't blame "Fuse".  I believe those companies have their hearts in the right places.  But, I do blame you as the ring leader of your band and pushing the line.  Be careful about claiming how victimized you are while you do nothing but predatory manipulative activities surrounding the Apache community.  The bottom line is, people are tired of it and you are getting called out.  Its about freaking time.

James Strachan-2 wrote
Sure. Like I said though, its not the centre of the universe; there's cool
stuff all over the place. Apart from in the Hadoop ecosystem, most of the
cool stuff seems to be increasingly outside of Apache these days. If Apache
is so amazing I wonder why?
Dude... there is the door.  Don't let it hit your ass on the way out.  No... I'm not threatening you (as you so eloquently claimed out of your sheer paranoia in the other thread).  If you don't like it here, then leave.  IMNSHO, the communities that you attempt to rape would be better off without you.

To the community. .. My apologies for the rant.  I'm just tired of it and this was a long time coming... :-(