[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[news.eclipse.technology.ejb-orm] Re: arent there now 2 official EJB3 Projects?

+1

Competition is real. Competition is good.

http://jroller.com/page/bobk?entry=eclipse_is_not_apache

Bob

Bjorn Freeman-Benson wrote:
 > Does the eclipse technology PMC have knowledge of this, namely Bjorn
 > Freeman Benson?

I do indeed know about this as does the entire Technology PMC and the EMO staff. Various actions were taken, but in the end the two projects chose to work separately.

Robert was very correct in his statement:

 > From my perspective, I would say that the bottom line is that it is a
 > question of the degree of control .  The Eclipse foundation is not a
 > controlling body as much as a governing one that establishes process.
 > A subtle difference.  As I see it, while the foundation encourages
 > collaboration and unity amoung projects, it does not enforce it.

The Foundation requires certain behaviors, encourages others, and lets the projects flourish on other axises. It would be a mistake to have a single controlling entity insisting that everything be done "The One Way" where there is so much energy, enthusiasm, creativity, and talent amongst our committers and members. I believe that one of the big keys to open source success is "openness" - the ability to let go of certain decisions and let those closest to the facts control the direction.

But I'm getting a little off-topic: the point here is whether this two ORM projects situation is sad:

 > This is really sad to hear about, as it is a precedence of substantial
 > fragmentation to occur among eclipse technology sub-projects.

I will say that it is disappointing, but it is not wrong and not a problem. Having two teams investigate similar issues from different approaches has certain benefits - for example, we get to compare and contrast two different approaches and then choose the best one. It has certain disadvantages as well - for example, if their approaches are similar, then one team's work may be "wasted" when it does not become the commonly accepted package.

 > So, at times these things will occur.

This is not the first instance in even Eclipse's short life, but it certainly is the most public.

I think we should get past the "why are there two ORM projects?" issue and work on the ORM technology - as Robert said "in the end there [will soon be] a solution ... for ORM in Eclipse and for today that is really what is important.".

-Bjorn