Geir, approaching Agila was our first avenue. We looked at what they had and I initiated several conversations about donating to that incubator project.
We offered a base line upon which to build but there did not seem to be any uptake although both committers said they were happy to have us come in and provide coding help on what they already had. I was a little mystified. Jumping in and bringing their stuff up to where we already were seemed counter productive given the large gap in code maturity and capability so we passed. Based on the support we have seen for our contribution from others in Apache thus far, I have to believe that our impression wasn't just the result of our inherent subjectivity I believe we did approach them in good faith and I'm not sure why there was disinterest in our offer via Agila but here we are. We left the previous conversation on good terms. At this point, my preference would be that the Agila folks look at the contribution and see if they want to become part of that larger community for this new baseline. To me, it's not about ownership, it's about critical mass in the community to carry something forward. Bill On 2/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why not just bring into Agila and work on it in there? > > Bill Flood wrote: > > Dims, > > > > We heard your plea and have moved the proposal through the incubator as > you > > suggested. At this point, we are looking for supporters. From the > energy > > you put behind your posting, we are all hoping you will also be > committed to > > helping us drive this forward. > > > > We are also reaching out to the Agila folks and anyone else who wishes > to > > get involved. > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OdeProposal > > > > Best, > > > > Bill > > > > On 2/3/06, Davanum Srinivas < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> *IF* that is the objective, then the correct way is to follow the > >> Apache Incubator process(es) draw up a proposal, name *ALL* the > >> committers in servicemix who are willing to contribute, add your own > >> team names, post the proposal to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. > >> Ask for more people to join, Proactively invite other folks (from > >> Apache and outside Apache as well) to join, seek active support of > >> exising Apache folks who may be interested in joining a BPEL > >> implementation. For god's sake just check the list of people who wrote > >> the original BPEL spec and compare it to the people who work at Apache > >> on web services related stuff and u will see what i mean. > >> > >> thanks, > >> dims > >> > >> On 2/3/06, Bill Flood < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> The dependency on Axis should be removed. It's the result of a couple > >> lines > >>> of dead code. BPEL 2.0 is an objective. > >>> > >>> The discussion over where the contribution lands is one of the most > >>> important aspects of the process. Too narrow a scope and the project > >> could > >>> fail to get critical mass, too wide and folks are worried about the > >> kitchen > >>> sink. If we can find the right balance we will be well served. > >>> > >>> We are not hardwired to any one particular approach and welcome > >> involvement > >>> from all corners. The ServiceMix approach has a few positives - by in > >> large > >>> they seem to like our contribution and they have critical mass. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 2/3/06, Davanum Srinivas < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > >>>> I was determined to stay of this, but alas! i could resist asking > >> this: > >>>> Would you be ok to having a stand alone project with committers from > >>>> servicemix, your team, people from other backgrounds (could be > >>>> existing ws committers) working on this code base, bring it up to say > >>>> BPEL 2.0 from BPEL1.1, upgrade it to say Axis2 from Axis 1.3 > >>>> etc.etc...OR are u insisting that this code has to go into servicemix > >>>> and nowhere else... > >>>> > >>>> If it is the latter, why? If it is the former, why is there so much > >>> resistance? > >>>> As they say, i'll take your answers off the air. > >>>> > >>>> thanks, > >>>> dims > >>>> > >>>> On 2/3/06, Bill Flood < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> Dims, I'll take Cory off the hook since he was acting in good faith > >> on > >>>>> behalf of Sybase :-). > >>>>> > >>>>> As we are learning, there are a variety of ways to work within the > >>> Apache > >>>>> process as long as the community is supportive. From the Sybase > >>>>> perspective, we are interested in working with a vibrant community > >> in a > >>>>> meaningful way that balances the needs of the community with that of > >> our > >>>>> own. > >>>>> > >>>>> when we first started thinking about the open source path, we looked > >> at > >>>>> Agila and communicated with the developers. While the Agila > >> developers > >>> were > >>>>> quite helpful, the project was not open to our contribution and our > >>>>> assessment was that their existing code line would take substantial > >> work > >>> to > >>>>> bring it up to where we thought we already were. > >>>>> > >>>>> When we looked at ServiceMix, we found a mature community that not > >> only > >>>>> appeared open to a contribution such as ours but one which would > >> help us > >>>>> establish a good affinity with the ESB. The Sybase folks working on > >>> this > >>>>> code line will continue to vigorously support the orchestration > >>> component > >>>>> and provide help in adjacent areas related to SCA. > >>>>> > >>>>> At this point, we feel comfortable in our contribution to the > >> ServiceMix > >>>>> project based on the positive uptake. Under the rules of > >> meritocracy, > >>> we > >>>>> will work to ensure that the interfaces remain clean and the build > >>> granular > >>>>> enough to be reused and hope to work with you in the future. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>> Bill > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> -------Original Message------- > >>>>>> From: Davanum Srinivas < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: Let's rewind!!! (Re: [VOTE] accept donation of a > >>> business > >>>>> process engine into the ServiceMix project) > >>>>>> Sent: 02 Feb '06 21:12 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cory, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Could you please get James' help and draft a complete proposal? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please see > >>> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=incubator+proposal+site%3Awiki.apache.org&btnG=Search > >>>>>> for a list of proposals, their format and their content. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Once the proposal is ready, please post it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Also, > >>>>>> please take a peek at the documentation on the > >>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/ site especially w.r.t to the > >> incubation > >>>>>> process, what to expect and steps involved. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> thanks, > >>>>>> dims > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 2/2/06, cory < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>> > Hi, > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > BPEL 1.1 is supported. The code works with Axis 1.3. > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > Sybase wants this code to be successful within the community > >> and is > >>>>>> > going to work to support it. > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > Cheers, > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > -cory > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > On 2/2/06, Davanum Srinivas < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > >>>>>> > > Folks, > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > There is no proposal, there is just a zip, unless someone is > >> a > >>>>>> > > clairvoyant, we can't figure out things like. *PLEASE* CC > >>>>>> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > - Which specific version of the spec is implemented? > >>>>>> > > - Where are the list of known issues? > >>>>>> > > - Where is the TODO list? > >>>>>> > > - Why is Axis version 1.2 RC1 (and not even Axis 1.2 final > >> even > >>> if we > >>>>>> > > forget that the current version is Axis 1.3) > >>>>>> > > - Is there any relation to workflow? > >>>>>> > > - Is there no opportunity for interaction with our Existing > >>>>> incubation > >>>>>> > > project Agila? > >>>>>> > > - Are there people from sybase who will be working? > >>>>>> > > - Geronimo is becoming an umbrella rapidly and now ServiceMix > >>> wants > >>>>> to > >>>>>> > > be one too? > >>>>>> > > - Why are people talking as though the code is FINAL > >>>>>> > > (Quoting greg - "there is no need to develope a community > >>> around > >>>>> this code") > >>>>>> > > (Quoting Rob - "If you've looked at the proposed donated > >> code, > >>> this > >>>>>> > > BPEL engine is complete, I can't see any sense in combining > >> it > >>> with > >>>>>> > > something else ?" ) > >>>>>> > > - Do *ANY* of the existing servicemix committers know this > >> code > >>>>> inside out? > >>>>>> > > - If people are not going to touch this contrib code with a > >> barge > >>>>> pole > >>>>>> > > then why should it be accepted? > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > thanks, > >>>>>> > > dims > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > On 2/2/06, James Strachan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>> > > > We have received the generous donation of a complete and > >>> working > >>>>> BPE > >>>>>> > > > engine to the ServiceMix project... > >>>>>> > > > > >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-servicemix-dev/ > >>>>>> > > > 200602.mbox/% > >>>>>> > > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] %3e > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > the contributor has offered to donate to Apache & complete > >> the > >>>>>> > > > necessary software grants & IP clearance and to work with > >> us on > >>>>>> > > > integrating it into ServiceMix. > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > For those of you maybe not aware; ServiceMIx is an ESB > >> project > >>>>>> > > > defined around JBI (JSR 208) the JCP standard API to > >>> integration > >>>>>> > > > components along with being the standard container model > >> for a > >>> BPE. > >>>>>> > > > ServiceMix already has the JBI container and has a suite of > >> JBI > >>>>>> > > > integration components already for smart routing, > >>> transformation, > >>>>>> > > > rules, scripting, auditing etc... > >>>>>> > > > > >>> http://incubator.apache.org/servicemix/Components > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > So it makes complete sense to add a BPE to that component > >>> suite. > >>>>> Note > >>>>>> > > > that since ServiceMix already has integration components to > >>> Apache > >>>>>> > > > Axis and Apache Tuscany, the integration of the BPE with > >>> ServiceMix > >>>>>> > > > should benefit those projects too (with Apache Synapse > >> possibly > >>> too > >>>>>> > > > via the Axis integration - though we need to work on that > >> one a > >>>>> bit). > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > Also having a BPE fully integrated into Geronimo via the > >> JBI > >>>>>> > > > container would mean that we could start to orchestrate > >> pretty > >>> much > >>>>>> > > > everything in the Geronimo stack! I'm certainly very > >> excited by > >>>>> this > >>>>>> > > > move... > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > [ ] +1 accept the donation into the ServiceMix incubator > >>> project > >>>>>> > > > [ ] 0 don't mind either way > >>>>>> > > > [ ] -1 I object because: ....... > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > Here's my +1 > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > James > >>>>>> > > > ------- > >>>>>> > > > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > -- > >>>>>> > > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > >> > > >
