atom feed14 messages in org.apache.incubator.generalRe: [discuss] Apache OpenWhisk Incuba...
FromSent OnAttachments
Sam RubyOct 13, 2016 1:27 pm 
Greg SteinOct 13, 2016 10:31 pm 
Mark StrubergOct 13, 2016 11:15 pm 
Sam RubyOct 14, 2016 3:29 am 
John D. AmentOct 14, 2016 3:50 am 
Felix MeschbergerOct 14, 2016 4:52 am 
Mark StrubergOct 14, 2016 6:37 am 
Felix MeschbergerOct 14, 2016 7:16 am 
Greg SteinOct 14, 2016 7:26 am 
Mark StrubergOct 14, 2016 7:51 am 
Mark StrubergOct 14, 2016 8:00 am 
Jim JagielskiOct 17, 2016 8:30 am 
Sam RubyOct 17, 2016 8:48 am 
Isabel Drost-FrommOct 19, 2016 3:58 am 
Subject:Re: [discuss] Apache OpenWhisk Incubator Proposal
From:Jim Jagielski (ji@jaguNET.com)
Date:Oct 17, 2016 8:30:15 am
List:org.apache.incubator.general

I see that this is a proposal that originates, basically from IBM.

I have an issue, based on past history, related to IBM's continued efforts and dedication on ASF projects. I will not mention specific projects, but the ASF has a number of projects which died (or almost died and only were revived via super-human effort) when IBM decided to switch gears and no longer support the project.

Now most of all this was our fault: the whole intent of Incubation and the Apache Way is to prevent dependence on a single person or entity: diversity means being able to continue, in a healthy way, should someone (or some-thing) decide that the project is no longer for them.

Considering all this, I would hope and expect that this podling take extra steps to ensure that we don't get "burned" again...

PS: Nothing against IBM of course: being a business, their strategy is wont to change, and we cannot (and should not) "fault" them when such a strategy change adversely affects a project. My only point is that, based on past experience, we should simply recognize that IBM dropping their support/resources on this project at some point is a very real, statistical possibility, and be serious in our efforts in ensuring this podling/project can and will survive that.