Submitted by abayer on Sat, 2011-01-29 13:26
(This was sent as an email to the Hudson dev and users mailing lists after voting concluded, but I thought it'd be good to post it here as well.)
The vote is closed, and the results are in. More than half of the total votes were from ineligible voters, but the result would have been the same either way. The final result of all eligible votes is as follows: 214 votes to rename, and 14 for the status quo. You can see the individual votes hudson-jenkins-vote.
First, my apologies for the lack of updates on the Hudson/Oracle situation for
the last few weeks. While talks have been ongoing, the holidays have slowed
things down, and we didn't want to send out information that would later turn
out not to be true. We've been waiting for the talks to reach a resolution -
and I believe they now have.
Since the java.net migration problems, Oracle and representatives from the
Hudson community have been involved in talks on the future of the project in a
number of areas. The Hudson representatives have been myself, Kohsuke
Kawaguchi, and Sacha Labourey (CEO of CloudBees and Kohsuke's boss), who was
brought in to help provide experience with discussions on a corporate/executive
level which neither Kohsuke nor I have, with Alan Harder and R. Tyler Croy
advising on the side.
These talks have in many ways been fruitful - we came to working agreements
with Oracle on the project infrastructure (such as mailing lists and SCM
repository location), code review policy for Hudson core, and perhaps most
significantly, a governance structure for the project going forward. Some
issues are not yet entirely resolved, such as questions on restrictions on
third party dependency licenses. But one issue, which we feel is the most
significant issue of all, one for which we now believe no resolution is
possible: the rights to the name Hudson.
Oracle has told us that they have trademark applications filed in both the EU
and US for Hudson, based on Hudson's creation by Kohsuke while working at Sun.
The problem is that this trademark ownership gives Oracle the ability to revoke
the Hudson project's right to call itself Hudson at any time, and while Oracle
has made an attempt to offer some guarantees (most notably, that binary
releases of Hudson, once they've been released with the name Hudson attached,
will always retain the right to the name), they are not offering any binding
guarantee that the Hudson project will be able to retain its use of the name in
Therefore, to continue using the name Hudson means ceding some of the project's
independence to Oracle - if the project and its governance board opted to go in
a direction Oracle disapproved of, Oracle would be able to take away the naming
rights. Or, in a less dramatic scenario, Oracle could insist on certain changes
to the code, infrastructure decisions, process, etc, regardless of opposition
from the Hudson development community, in order to retain the rights to the
In short, we'd be living under a sword of Damocles, regardless of the goodwill
of the individuals we've been negotiating with at Oracle - Hudson as a project
would be beholden to Oracle's whims for its continued use of its own name, and
we believe that's not viable.
[Ed. note Andrew was not involved in selecting this post's title - rtyler]
I wanted to give the Hudson community a quick update on the current status of the issues Tyler has discussed in the earlier posts here.
Friday afternoon, Kohsuke, CloudBees CEO Sacha Labourey and myself jumped on a conference call with Hudson contributor/Oracle employee Winston Prakash, Oracle manager Denis Tyrell and of course Ted Farrell.
We discussed a wide range of issues relating to the Hudson project, such as governance, the rights to the name Hudson, and the infrastructure hosting the Hudson project. While we didn't agree on resolutions to all issues, I feel real progress was made towards a framework that provides what the Hudson community needs while also preventing the sort of conflicts we've seen the last week or two.
More work has to be done - we'll be talking again next week, and I'm hoping we can reach agreement on the contentious issues by the end of the week.
Thanks for your patience.
Let me be the first to say thank you all for your overwhelming support for
Hudson and the work we've been doing. The Hudson community in general has
always been incredibly supportive and friendly, but the outpouring of support from
friends and users who've not previously spoken up has been awe inspiring.
That said, let's get down to business. As I covered
yesterday there is some
bubbling frustration within the developer community regarding some project
infrastructure decisions and Oracle's reactions to them. If you can't spare the
time to read that novel of a blog post, the extremely shortened version is: devs want to
move codebase to GitHub, Oracle disagrees and claims to have final say (hijinks
While there is still a lot unresolved, several of the core contributors are
debating and weighing our options for moving forward in a way that best
suits Hudson both as a project and community. In the next couple days, Kohsuke
or Andrew will be proposing a course of action for the community after some of
the options have been fully vetted. Please bear in mind that Hudson is a very big project with some fairly unique needs. We have hundreds of contributors committing either to core or the plugins, we release core once a week with plugin releases occurring to the tune of 20-40 updates a week. We've been pinging folks who work with various foundations and major open source projects to make sure we're covering all our bases to make sure distractions like this don't come up again for the foreseeable future.
Due to issues with MySQL, Java, OpenOffice/LibreOffice, there is clearly a lot of anti-Oracle emotion out there right now, but I want
to make sure that it's clear that this is not about "Us versus Oracle."
Our goal isn't to "stick it to the man," that doesn't help make Hudson any better.
Our goal is to foster the kind of community that we all want to
participate in, and to build and improve the best continuous integration
Stay tuned :)