New Home for Hudson?

Reactions: Hudson to Become Eclipse Project?

Jessica Thornsby

“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.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments