I'm sorry, but I have to vote -1 (binding). I'm not in favor of the ASF endorsing a specification that seems to be completely under the control of a small number of companies with no way for new developers to participate in its development. The fact that we have done this in the past is unfortunate, but it doesn't change things in my opinion. AMQP seems to be moving in this direction, they've got some sort of agreement you can sign in order to provide them feedback, that's a step, but I don't see any mailing lists, I don't see any way for someone who doesn't work for one of the companies in question to join as an equal member, and in general I think it's premature for the ASF to get involved, and accepting an incubator project is getting involved.
Additionally, since we've already decided that we need to do "something" about the open/closed specification question with regard to incubator projects, I think it's unfair to bring a new project into the incubator when it's possible that our decision could result in that project not being able to graduate. If we know we're going to have that debate eventually we should do so now, to wait until after the project is in incubation seems unfair to them. Finally, and I hate to say this because it may very well be just a cultural difference between projects the Glasgow developers have worked on and the way things work in ASF projects I'm familiar with, I think it's disturbing that all answers to questions concerning this proposal have been discussed in private and fed back to us through a single person. I don't see a community of individuals here, I see a collection of companies working to bring a new project to the ASF because they can benefit from the brand, and while that can certainly change with time its combination with the other problems means I can't vote in favor of the proposal. -garrett --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
