This was as overdramatic as I have learned to expect ever since the whole fork thing started.
Hudson cannot "lose" its plugins right now because there are no signifiant API/ABI changes between the two forks.
Also, I wonder how much these plugins are actually used? I've only installed mercurial on my servers and I'm pretty sure that will continue to be supported on any fork. As for the rest, as long as they are open-source they can always be forked too.
It's getting a bit tiresome to watch this unfold -- can't the new Jenkins community just go on with their life and make their fork as good as they can? They got what they wanted -- why the constant need to somehow prove something to Oracle?
Having such a big face-less enemy is the best thing that happened to this community as it gaves them something to bond against. I'm curios what will happen when the rush is gone.
As a developer i wouldn't want to get spammed by users for a software i don't support anymore. It's only the devs unsubscribing. Nothing wrong here. Also, i think to request the removal in a public mailinglist is fine, too. As a user of one of those plugins i'd like to know what happened when i find the plugin not working anymore.
Part of it is PR. If you're getting screwed by a company, you need to make sure people know.
The grunts in the field need to have a lot to backup any claims that company x will screw their organization over. If they don't have a solid laundry list of examples, it will never get past the 'steak and strippers' sales pitch.
By making this public the could save many, many, companies from being dependent on technology that oracle has crippled.
I don't think the answer is as simple because we don't know Oracle's side so to speak and from what I've read, I don't see where all the evil-ness is.
So, I don't know who's getting screwed here, but I'm siding with Oracle.
I wonder how would you feel to pay somebody full time for years to work on a project and then, when they leave your company, they fork the project and try their best to alienate all your users. Now, I've heard of burning bridges, but this takes it to a whole new level. If you think about it now, what exactly did Sun pay for when Kohsuke was working as an employee on Hudson? Apparently nothing.
I don't know. I mean, if you feel Oracle treated you like shit you can behave like this if you want to. To be the bigger man can be noble and all but blowing off some steam is pretty healthy.
Ah yes, I'd forgotten that mention of HN, I stand corrected.
Still, i fail to see how you can jump from that to "even MS responds to inconvinient stuff entering HN front page". If mention and quote is enough, then why would they have responded due to HN rather than DownloadSquad? Or the original Mozilla post itself? Or any other source such as Twitter?
MS's post there is embarrassing. They responded with only marketing buzzwords, mentioning only the vaguest technical points that don't really mean much by themselves. They proceed to quote two people that like IE.
We know Oracle won't do better than that if they respond (which I don't think they will), but it's just a little sad.
- Hudson is a free continuous integration (CI) tool written by Kohsuke Kawaguchi in Sun. [1]
- Oracle took control of Hudson as part of their Sun acquisition.
- Hudson devs wanted to move the infrastructure from Java.net to Github due to frustration with Java.net.
- Oracle objected the move to Github. Oracle said they owned the trademark to the Hudson name and the devs were free to fork under a different name if they wanted to. [2]
Oracle, the owner of the Hudson trademark, said that Hudson could not move itself to github even though the community wanted to. Oracle said the community would face legal action if they did the move anyway. The Hudson community responded by abandoning Hudson and renamed the Free code to Jenkins to avoid Oracle's trademark. Now all the plugin developers that previously wrote "Hudson" plugins are saying that they are now writing "Jenkins" plugins, and that Oracle has effectively killed one of their more popular open source projects.
"You'll see more code coming from Oracle as well now that we are mostly caught up after having parts of the Hudson infrastructure stolen away from us during the Jenkins fork."
There's not, in English anyway, but most books these days are designed to have the spine text upright when the book is stacked with the cover facing up. Not surprisingly, Oracle went with the opposite.
I believe there is a Wikipedia article that discusses the direction of text on book spines in detail, but I can't recall the name of it.
