brooklyn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aled Sage <aled.s...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: How are new features / project directions being discussed?
Date Fri, 09 Jan 2015 11:36:46 GMT
Chip,

Very good points.

We definitely fall into category (2): too much planning happening 
outside of the mailing list. We should remedy that - ensuring big 
features are proposed + discussed on the list, for all the reasons you give.

I'll make more of an effort to to do that, and would appreciate if 
others do the same.

---
Making a basic roadmap available for the community is also important. 
Should we set up http://wiki.apache.org/brooklyn, or alternatively just 
have it as a page on https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org (though that 
is slightly harder for the community to edit due to how the website is 
published).

Aled


On 07/01/2015 15:03, Chip Childers wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I spent a little time combing through the mailing list over the last
> couple of days. I think that the Brooklyn community is doing pretty well
> as a podling right now, but one thing struck me... and I wanted to ask
> about it.
>
> Keep in mind that I'm not familiar enough with the code itself to have
> any opinions about it, so my question is really a qualitative one about
> community communications and decision making.
>
> When I look at the ML, I see a significant percentage (if not all) of
> the technical decisions happening via pull requests. That's great, and
> it's a good way to do lower level code reviews. But what struck me is
> that I couldn't find any place where the community is collaborating on
> feature proposals, where the project wants to go, etc...
>
> Generally, I've seen that this means one of two things (or some
> combination thereof):
>
> 1 - The project is in a position where only minor work is occurring, and
> that's just the state of affairs. Nothing dramatic means no discussions
> to be had beyond the code-level reviews in the PRs.
>
> 2 - Some planning is happening outside of the project, and the project
> itself is only able to see the code contributions that are a result of
> that planing.
>
> Now, to be clear, item 2 is expected in some ways... Companies involved
> certainly have the right to plan their own areas of focus. No issues
> with that.
>
> However, since I said this is really a qualitative comment, the optics
> on the mailing list are that there doesn't appear to be a community
> planning process. Having a community planning process is something that
> can really help to attract people that might not have been contributing
> yet. It's also a great way to draw out ML lurkers that have been silent
> but are on the lists, so that they have a place to comment and provide
> feedback.
>
> To be sure, I don't see this as a *problem*, but more as an observation
> that may present an opportunity for Brooklyn to grow it's community.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -chip


Mime
View raw message