On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:46 PM Brian Stansberry <bstansbe@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-commonhaus. 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@lists.jboss.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave@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/MZVCWF77RY7SD6OXS2YCNZ4LMYU5IRUO/