incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <cctriel...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: FW: (qpid) Diversity
Date Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:38:57 GMT
Martin Ritchie wrote:
> On 06/03/2008, Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com> wrote:
>   
>> Daniel Kulp write:
>>  > a quick svn log on their SVN repo for all commits since Jan 1 [suggests
>>  that]
>>
>>     
>>> all but 4 commits since Jan 1 can easily be contributed to RedHat
>>>       
>>  employees.
>>
>>
>>     
>>> I think the above should provide enough information about the health and
>>>       
>>  > diversity of the community that actually working on the code.
>>
>>
>> What is the Qpid community's response to these findings?
>>
>>
>>         --- Noel
>>     
>
> Ok I have a few comments in response to the findings:
>
> - Firstly not all work is done on trunk so purely looking at trunk is
> not a good metric
>
> - Looking at the last two months especially as that includes the start
> of the year which is typically a quite period also will show poor
> commit numbers.
>
> - We are preparing for an M2.1 release so a lot of effort is being
> expended on that branch.
>
> My take would be to look at the last 6 months, which admittedly
> includes a number of holiday periods so the count of commits may be a
> little low. Since 2007-09 for the commits on the qpid repository
> shows:
>
> aconway 272
> aidan 54
> arnaudsimon 230
> astitcher 16
> cctrieloff 45
> gsim 201
> kpvdr 11
> nsantos 8
> rajith 169
> rgodfrey 99
> rgreig 98
> rhs 151
> ritchiem 593
> rupertlssmith 468
>
> 1103	RedHat
> 1312    Non-Aligned
>
> So Redhat have less than half the commits to Qpid so I don't think
> this is something we should worry about. Keeping an eye on for sure,
> but over analysing the alignment of those people that don't want to or
> are not allowed to say who they work for is not something that Apache
> requires nor would it be beneficial. Saying that we are not diverse
> because a lot of work on trunk has been done by a small set of people
> over a two month period is not helpful to the discussion.
>
> It is also worth noting that volume of commits does not in anyway
> correspond to the quantity of code changed and even looking at lines
> changes cannot say anything for the quality. I think the fact that we
> have an active project that has matured to the point that where we
> feel as though we can self regulate in the Apache Way speaks far more
> to the community of the project than identifying who is paying the
> bills.
>
> The whole project worked very hard to pull together two servers and
> five client libraries for the M2 release all talking AMQP 0-8. We are
> again working as a community to provide a M2.1 release that will inter
> operate at AMQP 0-9 with other AMQP products outside the Apache world.
> I for one am looking forward to our future releases where we can again
> move the entire project on to the wholly different AMQP 0-10.
>
>   


What is the next step on this? Does the concern still exist or should we 
take the next step.

regards
Carl.



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