community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ross.Gard...@microsoft.com>
Subject RE: Mailing lists, sites, ...
Date Sun, 18 Jan 2015 15:48:08 GMT
There are many reasons why the ASF requires projects to use its own servers for some items.
For example, we couldn't use GitHub until we had built a system that would provide adequate
traceability of contributions.

Failure to do that would have meant it was no longer possible to provide the legal umbrella
necessary to protect developers and reassure users.

Such work takes resources.

Add to that the fact there is no guarantee that an external service will still be available,
in an appropriate form, tomorrow. There is therefore a risk that projects will be damaged
by decisions outside of our control.

Replacing such lost services requires resources.

Finally, one of the advantages of the ASF is that once you know the core principles of how
one project works, you know them for all projects.

Our response to these issues is to require projects to use ASF provided services for essential
items.

What has been unclear is what are these essential items and what can our projects expect from
the ASF in the non-essential areas. David Nalley and I, as part of our budget planning, are
working on identifying what is considered core and what is not. This will help address the
confusion and therefore make it easier for  project communities to decide whether they can
use external services.

What we will not be doing is relaxing any of our rules designed to protect the independence
and legal governance of our projects.

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Jay Vyas<mailto:jayunit100.apache@gmail.com>
Sent: ‎1/‎18/‎2015 7:37 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org>
Subject: Mailing lists, sites, ...

Hi Apache .

Every so often we get the question come up: does Apache infra allow/support ____.  The answer
is sometimes "not yet" and related to the fact that there are 100s of projects that require
uniformity at Apache, and it would be chaos of every new project was allowed a new infrastructure.

Idea:

Now that project infrastructure is easier using things like github and static sites or google
groups forums etc.... Maybe the ASF could loosely agree to support some types of "alternative"
project tooling, as long all project conversations and decisions and artifacts were centrally
archived at Apache?This can easily be done by simply adding an Apache email address to a monitor
a particular forum , or github issues notifications or whatever.

Benefits of looser grip on community infrastructure:

The main benefit of Apache in a post github era is not the storage and mail servers - it's
the centralized archiving, community process, and transparent workflow.  And those things
can be implemented with any technology.

So, my general thought is : Apache still can enforce its core principals while loosening some
of the more granular rules around infrastructure . Maybe the time is now (or maybe not) to
start allowing projects to branch out their tooling  ... While still supporting the tried
and true mechanisms and not pressuring infra every time someone wants to use some new email
alternative or site hosting solution.

In any case looking  forward to feedback on this from some Apache veterans .





Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message