community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: projects.apache.org overhaul proposal
Date Thu, 15 Jan 2015 16:11:38 GMT
To put that last sentence in a more positive manner:

The future looks bright and is multi-coloured! But it is shrouded in layers
of mists. Unfortunately, so is the future influx of funds.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Maybe we should considering changing the subject as this seems bigger than
> just an overhaul of one of the front ends of the ASF?
>
> Yes, it all has to do with the ROI (the benefits at large vs the costs)
> for the ASF. And such need to be determined regarding the future, not the
> present day or the past. The time that the ASF was a one project endeavour
> has past, and the importance of the foundation in the umfeld is growing day
> by day. People are turning more and more  to the ASF with requests to host
> their open source projects.
>
> This all leads to more demand on solutions and services provided by INFRA.
> But also on our offices. More people/projects involved means more work on
> the heads in Brand Management, Legal, Communications, Secretary, etc. And
> these offices also use solutions/services of INFRA and/or third parties.
>
> Thus, any decision of this kind is should be taken must be weighed with
> the  future - the 5 year view - of the ASF and its offices in mind.
>
> So, what are the future demands on our offices? And how does that impact
> the solutions and services rendered by INFRA, and/or third parties? To what
> budget requirements will the availability of those (future) solutions and
> services lead, with the use of current setup? Can costs be saved by
> rethinking that setup and replacing it by something else, and do the
> projected savings outweigh the projected cost of change?
>
> Such questions must be considered regularly, because there is no guarantee
> that current influx of funds will be the same or even increase equally with
> the increase of needs/wants and pleasures of offices and projects and
> inherently the cost associated to all that. And then we can make the proper
> decisions.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>> > ...*historically*, when this kind of thing has happened (project
>> implements,
>> > thing becomes critical), gradually it becomes the responsibility of
>> Infra,
>> > not of the project, to do ongoing maintenance....
>>
>> Yes, this is why I'm reluctant to encourage any initiative that
>> requires our infrastructure team to support new tools. And I suspect
>> infra shares that reluctance ;-)
>>
>> That being said, it's always a question of benefits vs. costs - but if
>> a simple thing using technologies that every web developer is supposed
>> to know works the choice is a no-brainer for me.
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>
>

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