New Home for Hudson?

Reactions: Hudson to Become Eclipse Project?

Jessica Thornsby
Reactions-Hudson-to-Become-Eclipse-Project

“Needless to say, I was quite surprised!” says Kohsuke Kawaguchi.

Kohsuke Kawaguchi has shared his thoughts on Oracle’s proposal to
move Hudson to the Eclipse Foundation
. “Needless to say, I was
quite surprised!” he says. Kawaguchi argues that this move is
evidence of Jenkins’ success after the project separated from
Hudson, but he regrets that Oracle didn’t reach the conclusion to
move the Hudson trademark to a neutral third party, before the
split. According to Kawaguchi, he – and the rest of the Jenkins
community – had no prior warning of Oracle’s decision to propose
moving Hudson to Eclipse.

Kawaguchi questions how Oracle will handle some IP issues if the
move to Eclipse goes ahead, such as the current Hudson logo, which
is a Microsoft clipart, and his own contributions to the project
after he left Oracle : “which I don’t think Oracle can unilatelarly
donate to the Eclipse foundation.”

However, the move does have the support of Sonatype, who are
proposed as initial contributors to the Eclipse Hudson project, and
support Eclipse as a Strategic Member. Sonatype’s Jason van Zyl sees the opportunity to reunite
the Jenkins and Hudson communities, under the banner of the Eclipse
Foundation, in addition to reassuring enterprise users that the
Hudson community will continue to develop and remain a vibrant
place. With both Tasktop and VMware also proposed as initial
contributors, Zyl argues that Hudson will benefit from more
resources than ever. Sonatype for example, plan to contribute all
of their Maven 3.x integration to the project.

“We really think Hudson has found its new home. The Eclipse
Foundation is a highly respected organization, has proven to be a
vendor neutral, and has fostered many successful projects. Eclipse
would be a great place for Hudson and Jenkins to reunite and now
would be an ideal time. It can only be a good thing for users and I
sincerely hope that the Jenkins team will seriously consider this
option.” – Jason van Zyl.

Mik Kersten of Tasktop also agrees that Eclipse is a
perfect fit for Hudson, pointing to Eclipse’s track record of
“combining the interests of multiple vendors and community of
plug-in builders and contributors, to the net benefit of all
involved.” He sees Oracle’s proposal to move the Hudson-related IP
to Eclipse, as the “right thing” for ensuring the project’s
long-term success. He fears Jenkins and Hudson continuing to
develop along separate lines, resulting in confusion and friction
between the developer and corporate worlds. This would increase the
possibility of users migrating to a new, competing CI solution –
one without the drama. He claims this is something Takstop are
already experiencing: “since the announcement of the fork, we have
been witnessing our customers’ frustration from the lack of a clear
path forward from the current fragmentation and from the fear of
downstream incompatibilities, or of betting on the wrong
horse.”

Executive Director of the Eclipse Foundation, Mike Milinkovich focuses on the benefits of
moving Hudson to the Eclipse community: potential contributors will
no longer have to sign an Oracle contribution license agreement to
contribute code, and they can even maintain copyright over their
code. Eclipse will own the controversial Hudson trademark which
sparked the initial Hudson/Jenkins split, and will hold it in trust
for the “benefit of the entire community.”

“In our view, Hudson is coming to Eclipse for all the right
reasons. The Eclipse community is itself a big user of Hudson, and
we all look forward to the growth in momentum, innovation and
predictability that will result from this move. With the addition
of the Eclipse community processes for development, release and
intellectual property management, we’re confident that the Hudson
community and ecosystem will be thrilled with Hudson as an Eclipse
project,” – Mike Milinkovich.

However, project lead for the Eclipse Agent Modeling Platform,
Miles Parker, can see both positives and
negatives to this development. On the one hand, he views the move
as a win for the Eclipse community, and Oracle’s plan to transfer
the Hudson-related IP shows Eclipse in a positive, trustworthy
light. He also interprets this as evidence that corporations are
going to be increasingly forced to adopt a shared open governance
model. “The days when companies could get away with open sourcing
in name only are numbered. All of this is great news for the open
source movement,” he says.

However, on the other hand he believes that the Jenkins
community left Oracle, because Oracle was violating the open source
principle of committers leading the project. He sees Jenkins as
challenging the corporate mindset, and now the proposal to move
Hudson to Eclipse, puts Eclipse firmly on Hudson’s side in a Hudson
vs. Jenkins split. He proposes the Jenkins team being invited into
the new, proposed Eclipse project as the ideal outcome.

The full proposal behind the debate, can be viewed at the
Eclipse website.

Author
Comments
comments powered by Disqus