3 ms·

I've read it, and yet not understood which are those incompatibilities in the goals

by Ecio78 15y ago

aidenn0 15y ago
"To grow such an ecosystem the project must be fully vendor neutral, and implement a liberal (e.g. Linux-style) trademark policy allowing use of the trademark for third party distributions of the software, as well as for plug-ins and extensions."
- mcantelon 15y ago
  Ah, a Centos/Red Hat thing.
yk_42 15y ago
As I understand it (as a regular on the ZeroMQ and Crossroads mailing lists), the reasons are as follows: 1) Trademark issues - the original developers of ZMQ have been prohibited from using the ZeroMQ trademark and, thus, from making official releases. 2) The new ZeroMQ contribution policy[1], in which pull requests are merged without review and then later reverted/enhanced if necessary, is seen as incompatible with the goals of some of the lead developers. These developers prefer a more rigorous review policy. There are more reasons, but from what I can tell, those are the main ones that haven't fully been covered here. [1]: http://www.zeromq.org/docs:contributing http://www.zeromq.org/docs:contributing (see "Philosophy").
- mato 15y ago
  If you want more background to what led up to our fork of ZeroMQ, read the flamewar on zeromq-dev from February carefully hidden in a "C++ assertion" thread at http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/015675.html http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/0..., or from http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/015758.html http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/0... which relates directly to the trademark question.
  - DennisP 15y ago
    I noticed there's a compatibility library with 0mq. What are the technical changes that require a compatibility library? This seems to imply there are API differences, rather than just the same code with different development policies going forward.
    - obtu 15y ago
      The compatibility configure flag seems to be used to also install the crossroads library as libzmq.so.
obtu 15y ago
I'd say “personal differences” (regardless of the deal about trademarks and code review), but it still surprises me; I thought the zmq developers were a tight-knit bunch. Maybe the drama manifests itself in more extreme ways because they know each other so well, but it does seem dysfunctional.

I've read it, and yet not understood which are those incompatibilities in the goals

by Ecio78 15y ago

I've read it, and yet not understood which are those incompatibilities in the goals

"To grow such an ecosystem the project must be fully vendor neutral, and implement a liberal (e.g. Linux-style) trademark policy allowing use of the trademark for third party distributions of the software, as well as for plug-ins and extensions."

mcantelon 15y ago
Ah, a Centos/Red Hat thing.

yk_42 15y ago

As I understand it (as a regular on the ZeroMQ and Crossroads mailing lists), the reasons are as follows: 1) Trademark issues - the original developers of ZMQ have been prohibited from using the ZeroMQ trademark and, thus, from making official releases. 2) The new ZeroMQ contribution policy[1], in which pull requests are merged without review and then later reverted/enhanced if necessary, is seen as incompatible with the goals of some of the lead developers. These developers prefer a more rigorous review policy. There are more reasons, but from what I can tell, those are the main ones that haven't fully been covered here. [1]: http://www.zeromq.org/docs:contributing http://www.zeromq.org/docs:contributing (see "Philosophy").

mato 15y ago
If you want more background to what led up to our fork of ZeroMQ, read the flamewar on zeromq-dev from February carefully hidden in a "C++ assertion" thread at http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/015675.html http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/0..., or from http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/015758.html http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2012-February/0... which relates directly to the trademark question.
- DennisP 15y ago
  I noticed there's a compatibility library with 0mq. What are the technical changes that require a compatibility library? This seems to imply there are API differences, rather than just the same code with different development policies going forward.
  - obtu 15y ago
    The compatibility configure flag seems to be used to also install the crossroads library as libzmq.so.

obtu 15y ago

I'd say “personal differences” (regardless of the deal about trademarks and code review), but it still surprises me; I thought the zmq developers were a tight-knit bunch. Maybe the drama manifests itself in more extreme ways because they know each other so well, but it does seem dysfunctional.