Two weeks ago, Tim Fox asked What is the future of Vert.x? to initiate the discussion regarding the future of the project. After a lengthy discussion, Tim recommended the move to the Eclipse Foundation, and having proposed that and hearing no serious objections, proposed that the project be moved, provided that VMware had no objections.
Yesterday, Alexis Richardson from VMware confirmed that they had no objections to the plan, implicitly agreeing to transfer the Vert.X trademark to the Eclipse Foundation. Mike Milinkovich, executive director of the Eclipse Foundation, kicked off a thread on Moving Vert.X to the Eclipse Foundation, including the requirement to transfer the trademark to the Eclipse foundation.
Chris Aniszczyk has kicked the ball rolling with the Vert.X proposal, and has had updates already, including answering the question of "Why Eclipse?":
For the project to continue to flourish with a vibrant community it's important that the project is hosted in a neutral organisation where the aims of any one commercial entity cannot steer the project. We believe the project is owned by the community and it's up to the community, led by the project lead, to determine the course of the project.
We also believe that good IP management as provided by Eclipse will be a good thing for Vert.x as we aim to get more use in large enterprises.
The move to Eclipse, which will happen and probably be synchronized with a rename of the project's classes to something like org.eclipse.vertx, may culminate with a 2.0 release, which had been discussed before with a provisional estimate of March/April. With the move to the Eclipse foundation, this may change, but it's likely we'll see a 2.0 release coming from Eclipse at that point. With EclipseCon 2013 happening between March 25-28, it may be
If you'd like to know more about Vert.x, InfoQ has recently published an interview with Stewart Williams which explains what Vert.x is and how it can be customised.