3 ms·

So it sounds from the article like the people who initiated the Jenkins fork already declined EF administration. That means it is unlikely that it would remove

So it sounds from the article like the people who initiated the Jenkins fork already declined EF administration. That means it is unlikely that it would remove the fork. Also, something the article didn't explicitly call out.. Is the Hudson trademark also part of this proposal or does that stay in Oracle's sole control?

Lewisham 15y ago
Here's my take: 1. Oracle wanted full control of the project, which was clearly unlikely once Kohsuke left Oracle. 2. Once the Hudson team started acting somewhat autonomously, Oracle tried to frighten them out of doing anything without Oracle's say by invoking trademark litigation. 3. Rather than have a protracted battle, the Hudson team did actually begin talking to Oracle about taking the project to a foundation, such as Eclipse or Apache, to ensure legitimacy of process from both sides. Those talks broke down. I don't know any particulars, but I can believe that Eclipse was rejected and Apache favored. If Oracle was truly agnostic about it, Apache should have been fine. This makes me worried that there may have been (and still be) backroom deals going on to ensure Oracle gets preferential treatment. Your guess about keeping control of the Hudson trademark might well be something that got passed around. 4. Oracle absolutely did not plan for the Hudson team walking away from the name, and were arrogant enough to believe that when they did, the Hudson brand would live on and Jenkins would fade away. 5. Once is was clear that the heart of an open-source project is its developers, not its silent users (big surprise, right?), Oracle have tried to backpedal and have run into the arms of Eclipse to try and bring developers back. It won't work, and like another commenter said, if Eclipse does take them up on it, it will just look bad on Eclipse. Sadly, the Hudson name is completely tainted at this point. And its not correct to say "Well, that's OK, because users don't really care about all this stuff" because the users are developers, and they do care about this stuff. The rabble-rousers on the sidelines, like Sonatype, also look like jerks, but at least Maven is under Apache Foundation control, so while I can hate Sonatype, I can still use their product without too much fear.

Lewisham 15y ago

Here's my take: 1. Oracle wanted full control of the project, which was clearly unlikely once Kohsuke left Oracle. 2. Once the Hudson team started acting somewhat autonomously, Oracle tried to frighten them out of doing anything without Oracle's say by invoking trademark litigation. 3. Rather than have a protracted battle, the Hudson team did actually begin talking to Oracle about taking the project to a foundation, such as Eclipse or Apache, to ensure legitimacy of process from both sides. Those talks broke down. I don't know any particulars, but I can believe that Eclipse was rejected and Apache favored. If Oracle was truly agnostic about it, Apache should have been fine. This makes me worried that there may have been (and still be) backroom deals going on to ensure Oracle gets preferential treatment. Your guess about keeping control of the Hudson trademark might well be something that got passed around. 4. Oracle absolutely did not plan for the Hudson team walking away from the name, and were arrogant enough to believe that when they did, the Hudson brand would live on and Jenkins would fade away. 5. Once is was clear that the heart of an open-source project is its developers, not its silent users (big surprise, right?), Oracle have tried to backpedal and have run into the arms of Eclipse to try and bring developers back. It won't work, and like another commenter said, if Eclipse does take them up on it, it will just look bad on Eclipse. Sadly, the Hudson name is completely tainted at this point. And its not correct to say "Well, that's OK, because users don't really care about all this stuff" because the users are developers, and they do care about this stuff. The rabble-rousers on the sidelines, like Sonatype, also look like jerks, but at least Maven is under Apache Foundation control, so while I can hate Sonatype, I can still use their product without too much fear.