community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sharan Foga"<>
Subject Re: Possible ApacheCon BarCamp topic
Date Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:15:38 GMT
Thanks very much Christopher - I will add it to the list of BarCamp agenda ideas. 


On 2017-04-23 22:48 (+0200), Christopher <> wrote: 
> Unfortunately, I won't be flying in early enough to attend the BarCamp in
> Miami, but I wanted to suggest a possible topic, if anybody attending
> wishes to pick it up for discussion there:
> Topic:
> Establishing and strengthening relationships with downstream packaging
> The premise:
> Official ASF releases are source artifacts. Some users build from source or
> use "convenience binaries" published by ASF projects, but many (maybe
> most?) users experience Apache projects through a vendor or through their
> operating system software repositories (RHEL/CentOS, Fedora, Ubuntu,
> Homebrew, MacPorts, PyPI, RubyGems, etc.). Downstream typically falls into
> one of three categories: the DIY user, a commercial vendor supporting many
> users, or a community packager supporting many users. "Convenience
> binaries" produced within the ASF fall into the third category (one of many
> in that category). Though they may have different requirements, each of
> these categories have a similar relationship to our upstream software
> developer communities, and they are all important for project growth (the
> importance each plays in a particular community can vary significantly). I
> refer to all three of these as "downstream packagers" or simply "packagers".
> Some ideas for discussion:
> 1. How can we approach packagers to make our software available to their
> users?
> 2. How can we support packaging to ensure a positive experience for both
> packagers and end-users?
> 3. How can we grow our upstream community by encouraging contributions from
> packagers?
> 4. How can we build our software with build- and runtime-flexibility, to
> support the different target environment requirements of many packagers
> (rather than just a few)?
> 5. How can we work with packagers to deal with "dependency hell"?
> 6. How can we simplify/modernize build systems to make it easier for
> non-committers to build from source?
> 7. Which responsibilities are that of the upstream project, and which
> should be deferred to downstream?
> 8. How do new packaging/distribution technologies, such as Docker, Mesos,
> and Yarn, change the traditional relationship with packagers?
> Conclusion:
> Some ASF projects (such as httpd, subversion, ant, and perhaps now maven)
> seem have had a lot of success via these downstream community packaging
> routes (as have other non-ASF open source projects, like Firefox, MySQL,
> PHP, Ruby, etc.). Other ASF projects, however, may still be unclear how to
> relate to downstream and what that relationship can bring to the project's
> upstream community.  So, I think this could be a potentially valuable topic
> to discuss.
> Extra:
> As both a Fedora packager and an Apache contributor, as well as an
> occasional HomeBrew, and frequent DIY user, I find this topic fascinating.
> Whether or not it gets discussed at the BarCamp, feel free to reach out to
> me during ApacheCon. I'd love to discuss these (or any other) topics over
> drinks or lunch or between talks.
> P.S. For those unfamiliar, Apache even it's own "downstream" packager
> project known as BigTop, that I encourage checking out (and possibly
> contributing to).

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message