Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
From: Alex Hitchins <alex@alexhitchins.com>
To: <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
References: <03ff01d2f18e$6b24a760$416df620$@alexhitchins.com> <d7bc9f94-2dda-3d2a-7eb3-094ca87bbd63@artifact-software.com>
In-Reply-To: <d7bc9f94-2dda-3d2a-7eb3-094ca87bbd63@artifact-software.com>
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 14:32:57 +0100
Message-ID: <044d01d2f1a5$63a15120$2ae3f360$@alexhitchins.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQI/XF/q+f40Kg0AaIN1HcooSwERtAFttsePoVkfsHA=
Content-Language: en-gb
archived-at: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 13:33:05 -0000

I'll read those links, thank you for providing them.

Do you think this is a move in the wrong direction or just an =
unnecessary move to begin with?

Alexander Hitchins
------------------------
E: alex@alexhitchins.com
W: alexhitchins.com
M: 07788 423 969
T: 01892 523 587

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Wheeler [mailto:rwheeler@artifact-software.com]=20
Sent: 30 June 2017 14:06
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof


https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html says:
"If you have a specific target or project that you wish to directly =
support, pleasecontact us =
<https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html#Fundraising>and we =
will do our best to satisfy your wishes."

1) Is Apache willing to allow projects to set up their own foundations?=20
I doubt but someone would need to check this out.
Does the PMC have the project charter or the agreement that was signed =
when Cloudstack moved.

2) Has anyone tried to contact Apache about directing support to =
Cloudstack.

I am not convinced that lack of paid staff is the issue.
This discussion reminded me of this.
Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb ?
A: Only one, but the lightbulb must want to change

http://www.lightbulbjokes.com/directory/p.html


Ron


On 30/06/2017 6:48 AM, Alex Hitchins wrote:
> As per Giles's comment to the previous thread, I thought I would start =
a discussion on the subject to canvas peoples thoughts, opinions and =
fears.
>
> My question for discussion, is there is any mileage in someone =
creating a "CloudStack Foundation" as a non-profit entity, funded =
largely by key CloudStack players with the sole function of employing =
dedicated resource (part or full time) to handle all releases and other =
essential 'back office' functions. The idea being it's in everyone's =
interest to chip in a little each to fund core project and release =
management.
>
> The idea might be utterly irrelevant, pointless and/or straight up =
daft. I urge you all to let me know.
>
> Something for you all to think over this weekend.
>
>
> Alexander Hitchins
> ------------------------
> E: alex@alexhitchins.com
> W: alexhitchins.com
> M: 07788 423 969
> T: 01892 523 587
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Giles Sirett [mailto:giles.sirett@shapeblue.com]
> Sent: 30 June 2017 09:51
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JIRA - PLEASE READ
>
> All
> This thread seems to have turned into 2 quite different discussions:
>
> 1. The use (or not) of Jira - which was the original discussion
>
> 2. Ways/means of encouraging (and paying for more structured=20
> contributors)
>
> I know that it could be argued that these are related. Could I suggest =

> opening up a thread on "release and project management and funding it" =
=20
> and keeping this thread to the original discussion
>
> (I will weigh in on both of these at some stage)
>
> Kind regards
> Giles
>
> giles.sirett@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>   =20
>  =20
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Hitchins [mailto:alex@alexhitchins.com]
> Sent: 29 June 2017 18:49
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JIRA - PLEASE READ
>
> If it isn't being treated as a product it will be very impossible to =
market it as enterprise ready.
>
> I know we all know this.
>
> Similar sized projects under the Apache banner must have the same =
issue, what is the best way to gather experience of these projects? See =
how they handle these growing pains.
>
> A cloudstack foundation entity funded by companies earning from =
cloudstack seems a good way forward.
>
> Another tuppence, this is getting expensive.
>
>
>
>> On 29 Jun 2017, at 18:18, Ron Wheeler =
<rwheeler@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>>
>> I understand that it is a volunteer organization.
>> I do not know how many (if any) of the committers and PMC members are =
funded by their organizations (allowed or ordered to work on Cloudstack =
during company time) which is often the way that Apache projects get =
staffed.
>>
>> Clearly it is hard to tell someone who is being funded by a company =
to fix a problem or who is working on their own time, to do or not do =
something.
>>
>> On the other hand, the PMC has to  build a community culture that is =
good for the project.
>> That means describing a vision, planning and enforcing a roadmap, and =
 maintaining a focused project "marketing" effort.
>>
>> There is a lot of extremely talented individuals working on =
Cloudstack and it appears to have a very strong and valuable code-base.
>>
>> To me the key question is about the PMC and the core committers' =
ability to make Cloudstack a "product" that can compete for market share =
and acceptance.
>>
>> Is Cloudstack at a point in its development where it should be =
treated like a product?
>> - sufficient functionality to compete
>> - sufficient user base to be a competitor in the market
>> - production reliability and stability
>> - business model for supporting companies to justify their continued=20
>> support
>>
>> This may not require more effort but requires different policies and =
different activities.
>>
>> There has to be someone or a PMC  that can say "No".
>> - This change can not be included in this release because it will =
delay the release.
>> - This change adds an unacceptable level of complexity
>> - This bug fix will have to wait for the next release because it is =
too late to test it and fix the docs.
>> - This fix breaks the docs
>> - The release can not be made until this doc is updated.
>>
>> Does the core group want to make it a competitive product or is it =
sufficient for the interested players to continue in its current form?
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 29/06/2017 9:42 AM, Will Stevens wrote:
>>> I personally don't know how Jira solves any of this, but assuming it =

>>> does, fine...
>>>
>>> The bigger problem which you have raised is that CloudStack has zero =

>>> funding. So we can't hire a project manager, or a release manager or =

>>> someone whose job it is to maintain documentation. I have been=20
>>> trying to find a way to, at the very least, fund a full time release =

>>> manager who can focus 100% on the project. As the release manager=20
>>> for 4.9, I know it is a full time job. I did my best, but it is a=20
>>> ton of work and is hard to stay on top of.
>>>
>>> Everyone contributing to CloudStack is donating their time. They=20
>>> can't make a living off supporting ACS, so every one is doing their=20
>>> best with the little time they can take away from their day job or =
their family life.
>>>
>>> Yes, having clear guidelines and sticking to them helps, but without =

>>> a solid CI infrastructure backing the project and improved testing=20
>>> and automation, we will always struggles with release schedules and =
such.
>>>
>>> I have been involved in this project long enough to know that all=20
>>> the problems you point out exist, but they are also not easily =
solved.
>>> Obviously we have to work with the initiatives we have and take=20
>>> small steps towards improvement, but we also have to be realistic=20
>>> with our expectations because we are counting on people's generosity =
to move them forward.
>>>
>>> Simplifying moving parts and streamlining the process will lead to=20
>>> more contribution because there is less barriers to entry. This one=20
>>> reason why I struggle to see the value in Jira as it is used today.=20
>>> I personally don't understand what value it is giving us that the=20
>>> github PRs and Issues don't solve.
>>>
>>> I will remain open minded and will follow along with what people=20
>>> think is best, but I think it is worth understanding what we are=20
>>> trying to solve for and simplify our approach in solving it so we=20
>>> can get better systems in place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 29, 2017 9:17 AM, "Ron Wheeler"
>>> <rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As a real outsider, IMHO Paul is right.
>>>>
>>>> At times it seems that Cloudstack is a coding hobby rather than a=20
>>>> project or a production quality product.
>>>>
>>>> Who decides what goes into a release? How does this affect the=20
>>>> release schedule?
>>>> Who is responsible for meeting the "published" roadmap (of which=20
>>>> there seem to be many) of releases?
>>>>
>>>> How is a system admin that is not part of the project supposed to=20
>>>> plan for upgrade windows?
>>>> How does one know when a feature, bug fix or release will be =
available?
>>>>
>>>> How does the PMC  manage function creep  in a release, maintain=20
>>>> quality and consistency, reject changes that hurt the overall=20
>>>> vision or add too much complexity?
>>>>
>>>> No one seems to care about documentation but if someone did, how=20
>>>> would they stop undocumented features or features that contradict=20
>>>> the documentation from being incorporated?
>>>> Who makes sure that the documentation is correct at the time of the =

>>>> release?
>>>> Release notes are not much help for someone doing a new install or=20
>>>> evaluating Cloudstack.
>>>>
>>>> Without a JIRA entry, how does an end-user who encounters a problem =

>>>> know that it has been fixed already in the next release?
>>>>
>>>> Without a JIRA entry, how does the community comment on a proposed=20
>>>> change before it gets coded?
>>>>
>>>> If changes are going to be accepted without a JIRA, is there a=20
>>>> definition of a minor fix that does not require a JIRA?
>>>> - does not change functionality?
>>>> - only affects an "edge case" or cleans up an exception that is not =

>>>> properly handled?
>>>> - only improves code readability or future extensibility?
>>>> - does not affect documentation?
>>>>
>>>> Apache projects that are popular and enjoy wide support do have=20
>>>> strong management.
>>>>
>>>> There are other examples where great Apache software is failing to=20
>>>> get recognized because the PMC is not paying attention to the=20
>>>> product management side of things.
>>>> I use Apache Jackrabbit which is a quality product with a strong=20
>>>> technical team supporting it.
>>>> It has very little following because the documentation and=20
>>>> marketing collateral is very poor.
>>>> It gets by because the audience for it is largely software=20
>>>> developers who can read code and can test features to work out the =
functionality.
>>>> It would get a lot more attention if they paid attention to the=20
>>>> product management side of the project.
>>>>
>>>> Cloudstack needs to avoid this situation and unfortunately this=20
>>>> takes effort and some discipline.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 29/06/2017 8:03 AM, Will Stevens wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Why are we still using jira instead of the PRs for that=20
>>>>> communication? Can we not use issues in github now instead of jira =

>>>>> if someone needs to open an issue but does not yet have code to=20
>>>>> contribute. If not, jira could still be used for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think duplicating data between jira and the PR is kind of=20
>>>>> pointless. I feel like the github PRs and the cide going in should =

>>>>> be the source of truth, not a random third party tool.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the 4.9 release notes, i built a tool to generate the release=20
>>>>> notes from the PRs merged in that release. I think that is easier=20
>>>>> and more accurate than depending on jira since it does not track=20
>>>>> the actual code tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thats my 0.02$.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 29, 2017 5:25 AM, "Paul Angus" <paul.angus@shapeblue.com> =
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Such a view of CloudStack is what holds CloudStack back.
>>>>> It stops users/operators from having any chance of understanding=20
>>>>> what CloudStack does and how it does it.
>>>>> Code for code's sake is no use to anyone.
>>>>> Jira is about communication between developers and to everyone =
else.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Angus
>>>>>
>>>>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>>>> www.shapeblue.com
>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogland@gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: 29 June 2017 10:14
>>>>> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: JIRA - PLEASE READ
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Paul Angus=20
>>>>> <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> + Release notes will be impossible to create without a proper=20
>>>>>> + Jira
>>>>>>
>>>>> history.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And no one will know what has gone into CloudStack.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No they are not mr Grumpy. they should be base on the code anyway, =

>>>>> hence on git, not jira. I do not appose to the use of Jira but it=20
>>>>> is not required for good coding practices and as we are not and=20
>>>>> will not function as a corporation, jira is an extra for those=20
>>>>> that grave for it. not a requirement.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Daan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ron Wheeler
>>>> President
>>>> Artifact Software Inc
>>>> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>>>
>>>>
>> --
>> Ron Wheeler
>> President
>> Artifact Software Inc
>> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>
>
>

--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102