On 3/15/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > > - The presence of ActiveCluster/ActiveIO which were separate projects > > in codehaus (is the active cluster code inside the milestone? i don't > > see a separate jar). > > > > These are two small libraries used in AMQ that don't warrant their own > project. The original founders of those projects had big aspirations at > the time they were formed at the CodeHaus a few years back. If they had > known what was in store for their future, maybe it would have been done > differently. Hindsight is 20/20 I guess. > > > - The lack of discussion on say the OpenWire stuff. I see one status > > email[1] that's it. the other 26 people don't seem to have any opinion > > on it. Are people talking offline? > > > > OpenWire has been around for a long time, way before incubation, so most > of the development issues were worked out a long time ago. You'll see > bursts of traffic about it as people add new language bindings. > However, I see a lot of discussion about it this month. A large bulk > of the communication on the AMQ list is about OpenWire C/C++.
Sorry to harp on a bit more with generic opinions that may or may not apply :) A 3-deep umbrella is another warning sign. I've found that the subprojects of subprojects are much harder for a PMC to maintain oversight over - given that they can't have sub-PMCs as such would be an example of redundant foundationing. Over the time many of the PMC don't even know that they exist. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
