incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was: [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
Date Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:13:51 GMT
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:18, Niall Pemberton
<niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
>> how to work here at Apache.
>>
>> It is not about making podlings thoughtlessly follow checklists.
>>
>> It is about TEACHING them what are the important aspects of
>> development at Apache. About SHOWING them each of the items to be
>> aware of.
>>
>> It is not about blind adherence to rules and procedure without regard
>> to the podling's experience.
>>
>> It is about LEARNING who the podling is, what they do, what they have
>> done, and what they are capable of, and producing a TEACHING
>> experience for that podling so that they can be an effective and
>> proper project here at the ASF.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> I was thinking, "hey. no problem. we can go a bit out of our way and
>> produce a release tuned for the Incubator needs" and made a
>> suggestion. That didn't satisfy some people, so further requirements
>> were thrown in. "hmm", I thought, "well... that shouldn't be too much
>> more of a burden".
>>
>> And then I received Craig's email below, and it brought me back to
>> sanity. I had been forced off the path, and now realize just how crazy
>> it is.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 20:19, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
>>>...
>>> As I thought I said earlier, *any* release that has proper Apache packaging,
>>> licensing, and notices is fine with me. We've had this discussion in the
>>> incubator before, for similar reasons, and I think there is consensus that a
>>> formal review of a podling release is a reasonable gate for graduation. No
>>> one needs to believe that the release is stable, tested, reliable, etc.; it
>>> just needs to be reviewed.
>>
>> Please let me translate:
>>
>> "ANY release is fine, even if that release DOES NOT satisfy the
>> project's ESTABLISHED LEVELS OF QUALITY. Shoot. All we want is
>> *something*. Oh, and since it has completely inferior quality, it
>> doesn't even have to be distributed! See how easy that is! Oh, never
>> mind, that if we don't put it into the regular distribution channels,
>> and don't make the regular announcements, then YOU'RE NOT DOING A REAL
>> APACHE RELEASE."
>>
>> Nope. No way.
>
> The key question in my mind is "What tasks does subversion need to
> undertake as part of its moving to the ASF so that any release it
> produces conforms to the ASF's policy on releases?". This itself is
> really part of the whole IP due diligence in bringing any code base
> here to the ASF IMO.
>
> So for example you're going to have to go through the pain of
> conforming to the policy on license headers for source files and the
> NOTICE and LICENSE files etc. I would expect that you would do that as
> part of the incubating process. I don't know how subversion actually
> creates its source release, but I would assume its a pretty trivial
> effort to create a an example/internal source distro that could be
> reviewed.
>
> This is what I think Craig was asking and it seemed to me like he was
> agreeing with your *internal release* suggestion - so I think you did
> him a big disservice with this rant.
>
> The only way reason I can think that you would object to this (because
> of the effort) is if you didn't plan to sort out subversion to conform
> to ASF policy before graduation. If you do plan to sort out all these
> things before graduation then its simply a case of running whatever
> command(s) you use to create the source distro on subversion's trunk
> and providing it for people to review. And I assume (and I believe
> Craig did as well) that that sort of *internal release* would be a
> pretty trivial effort and not much of a burden to ask. If you don't
> plan to sort these things out prior to graduation then thats probably
> the real argument (waiver) you need to get agreement on from the IPMC
> (rather than release).

That's not a release. I've been asking to skip the *release* requirement.

Construct a tarball for legal review? Not a problem. We're going to be
integrated into the ASF buildbot network almost as soon as the
repository migrates. That thing chunks out tarballs, apparently. Not
sure if it puts those on svn.apache.org/snapshots/, but that's where
I'd like to see them. One of the committers runs nightlies, so we can
easily migrate that process.

Cheers,
-g

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


Mime
View raw message