4:24 a.m.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:46 PM Brian Stansberry <bstansbe(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
(project leads -- please be sure to read the 'If you
maintain' part below.)
I'd like to take the next step in transitioning the WildFly project to a
vendor-neutral foundation by applying to Commonhaus. We've been talking
about this for quite a while, gathering input, and the consensus I've seen
has been that Commonhaus is the best option. I think Commonhaus’ guiding
principles around honoring project and community identity and offering
guidance instead of mandates, with its “community-first” governance model,
make it the best for WildFly.
The process of applying is covered at
https://github.com/commonhaus/foundation/discussions/new?category=joining....
I'm hoping to initiate a discussion by the end of this week. That entails
filling out the issue template linked above and sending up a PR with the
necessary information.
Note that I'll be applying for the 'WildFly' project, which is somewhat
nebulously defined. A simplistic, and incomplete boundary is that it covers
the non-archived projects hosted in the 'wildfly' GitHub organization. It
will also cover non-archived projects in the 'wildfly-extras' GitHub org,
except, perhaps:
creaper
sunstone
wildfly-camel
wildfly-camel-book
wildfly-camel-examples
It can cover those as well, but I want to check with the respective
project maintainers that that's what they want.
It will also cover a few repos in the 'jboss' and 'jbossas' Github orgs
that really should be moved to the 'wildfly' org.
If you maintain a project that is not in one of the categories above but
that you believe fits into WildFly project governance, or could fit into a
sensibly modified WildFly governance, and you'd like it to be considered
part of this application, please let me know. If you want to discuss it
here, that's fine.
I would also like to propose we consider the projects under the
wildfly-security organisation in GitHub and even wildfly-security-incubator
with the last being more of an experimental separation than true
independendence.
For WildFly Elytron and our related projects (elytron-web, elytron-ee,
elytron-mp) the reason these projects came into existence were to meet the
security needs of WildFly for the future. However these projects have been
developed to be usable independently of WildFly and there are some cases
where that happens but I don't think that would prevent them coming to a
foundation with WildFly.
At the same time we would not make any changes to these projects to make
them less relevant outside of WildFly.
Then another group of projects under wildfly-security are for WildFly
OpenSSL, again primarily developed to meet a need in WildFly but developed
using standard security provider APIs to enable use anywhere.
Some (not definitive) considerations as to whether a project 'fits'
* Is it somehow 'WildFly' branded, or perhaps 'JBoss' branded as a
leftover from 'JBoss AS'?
* How much is it used outside of the various WildFly deliverables?
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP
WildFly Project Lead
He/Him/His
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list -- wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave(a)lists.jboss.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/privacy-policy
List Archives:
https://lists.jboss.org/archives/list/wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org/message...