incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mankovskii, Serge" <Serge.Mankovs...@ca.com>
Subject RE: [PROPOSAL] Poloka
Date Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:20:21 GMT
Hello Roland

Thank you for the comments! It is encouraging to see that somebody
undertook an effort of reading the proposal so carefuly and giving so
many good comments!

We have started a discussion with Davanum Shrinivas from the Apache WS
community. We asked Davanum to Champion the project within Apache.
Davanum suggested that we post the proposal in the Incubator list and in
the Apache Savan development list. The idea is to create an open
discussion that would determine how and where Poloka project would be
sponsored.  I have posted the proposal in the Savan list as well. 

Yeh, "Mentor" section of the proposal should be renamed. The idea here
is to separate the developers working on the code from domain experts
that are taking part in this projct. The Domain Experts are currently
consulting developers on the intent of the standards and also on the
domain of enterprise software systems from the point of view of future
users. Would renaming this section to "Domain Experts" make sense to
you?

Regarding the GPL code. Our intent is to remove all GPL dependency from
the code prior to the initial relaease. None of GPL dependencies will
remain in the list.

I agree that University Research Community and Open Source Community not
the same, but they are similar in some respect. They are simmilar
because there is constant sharing of ideas through publications, demos
and conferences. Researches working in the same field often know each
other personaly. They comment on each other work and give tips on how to
move forward. They are diffent in terms of code charing. It is not
happening a lot on the research side currently. And yes, we do not know
exactly how it is going to work in this enviroment, but we are willing
to give it a try by relasing our stuff in the open. We are interested in
making it work. Resesach progress could go so much faster if it would
really happen. We have good indicatation from our peers so far.We have a
long list of researchers that indicated that they would like to see this
stuff in the open and contribute to it.

So far PADRES code base has been developed through constant interaction
and continous integration. The codebase is open to everybody in the
project and eveyone can poetentially make changes to everybody else's
code. In fact this is happening a lot when a student is preparing to
graduate or past graduation. We expect that there will be more of that
once the project is open sourced. The students would charge ahaed
working on their ideas. This code will be visible to the community and
anybody would have ability to contribute to that direciton if it makes
sense to them. Isn't it how Apache project operate?

I think I already addressed your comment about meritocracy by describing
how the team operates. Does it make sense? 

The time span a thesis development is 2-3 years. Sometimes a student
would go for a master and a doctor thesis and then it might take twice
as long. In fact Alex Cheung is one of the people like that. He has been
with the project from day one and he is still there contributing
actively. 
 
Prof. Arno Jacobsen is conducting regular code reviews and is involved
in architecture, design, troubleshooting, evaluations, and experiments.
You are right, he is expected to commit more on the documentation side
than on the code base.


Cheers,
Serge

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Roland Weber [mailto:ossfwot@dubioso.net] 
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 3:48 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Poloka

Hello Serge,

have you contacted the WebServices PMC about sponsoring
this proposal? general@ws seems to be a good place to
pitch it and see how it fits into the existing web services
projects at Apache.
http://ws.apache.org/mail.html

The "Mentors" section is somewhat irritating, as the
Incubator also defines the role of a Mentor:
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#M
entor
Maybe you can rename the section to distinguish it
from the "Nominated Members"?

The "External Dependencies" section lists mysql-connector.jar
as GPL-licensed. Is the code using that JAR directly, or does
it access MySQL through a standard interface like JDBC?

The "Required Resources" section is meant to list the resources
you will need at Apache. "it exists" is not correct there, since
currently no Apache resources have been created for you.

The "Orphaned Projects" section says "no risk".
There is always a risk... Requests from individuals to
get source code is a sign of _potential_ users, which
_potentially_ could become developers at some time.
Major software companies can change their plans and
cut the funding for working on an open source project.
I wonder how the University Research Community will interact
with an open source community. Students working on a project
to get a degree might have a short-term interest, contributing
for a few months then loosing interest once they get their
degree - just when they could have become committers. So this
involvement depends on either students picking up a personal
long-term interest, or professors bringing in new students.
There's nothing wrong with that, but bringing in new people
requires some effort of the existing community to show them
the way. You can't run a project only with short-termers.
Also, community merit is earned by regular contributions
over a period of time. Students working on the project
will have to get involved in a continuous way, not by
working secretly on their thesis and dropping the result
onto the community in a big-bang style when they're done.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that all bad things
will happen and that the project is going to collapse.
Also, my university experience is somewhat outdated
(10 years ago) and certainly not representative. But
maybe you can change "no risk" to "low risk"? Turning
several interested people and parties into a working
open source community is not as easy as it may seem.

The "Meritocracy" section sounds as if there is no
meritocracy at all, and the "Community" section
(...managed and organized by MSRG...) as well as the
"Required Resources" section (...not available outside
of the MSRG) add to that picture. From what I read,
I believe you have a closed group of developers
(=researchers+students) and that MSRG manages the
development activities in a hierarchical way.

There is a small mismatch between the lists of
"Core Developers" and "Initial Committers".
You are not mentioned as a core developer, but you
probably will help with project organization,
web site and other things. Arno Jacobsen is not
mentioned as a core developer either, but the
"Mentors" section says:
<quote>
   Dr. Hans-Arno Jacobsen is the head of the
   Middleware Systems Research Group and he is
   leading all current research activities.
</quote>
Does the head and leader really find the time
to get his hands dirty with the code and docs
in the repository? Apache accounts are given to
people who have a need for them.


I'm not going to comment on the technical side
of the proposal. Web services are not my area
of expertise or interest.

cheers,
   Roland


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message