incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Future of RAT
Date Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:52:34 GMT
I'd be willing to help out with a RAT TLP.  We're using it in our normal
build process for OpenJPA, Geronimo and Bean Validation, so helping out
on future votes is the least I can do.

-Donald


On 8/12/10 5:52 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>>
>>>> The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
>>>
>>> [absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
>>>
>>>> My concern is if RAT goes TLP then it may be a small step away from
>>>> not being able to get 3 PMC votes.
>>>
>>> I understand that and share the concern to some degree.
>>>
>>> RAT has probably never been the primary project for any of its
>>> contributors.  Most of us jumped in to scratch specific itches and other
>>> than that RAT is a side project somewhere down the list of projects we
>>> contribute to regularly.  Pretty far down.
>>>
>>> That being said, we are aware of the problem and have tried to address
>>> that by adding four more committers last December, that doesn't seem to
>>> have been enough.
>>>
>>> One reason probably is that RAT does what it is supposed to do well
>>> enough for most of us - the feedback of people who said RAT was so
>>> important to them that it should become a TLP indicates it is good
>>> enough for most other people as well.  In a way RAT has already been
>>> mature and in maintenance mode when it entered incubation.
>>>
>>> So yes, development activity is low.
>>>
>>> OTOH patches get applied and releases are made if there is anything to
>>> fix.  I'm sure we could have gotten more people to vote if it had been
>>> necessary on the last release, it just wasn't necessary so people
>>> preferred to work on other things rather than checking releases.
>>
>> Right. it is being properly managed.
>>
>> Just like the Apache Tcl TLP. And Apache Excalibur. And Apache Perl.
>> ... could probably find a few more low-activity TLPs, but I believe
>> you see my point. It isn't about activity either. It is about whether
>> you have eyeballs on the community and the codebase.
> 
> Clearly then there are small TLPs that operate effectively. However
> any TLP that can't get 3 PMC votes is effectively dead and I don't
> want to see RAT end up in that situation in a year or two. Seeing only
> 3 votes on the RAT 0.7 release from its PPMC raises that concern.
> 
> Niall
> 
> 
>> Cheers,
>> -g
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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