incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cédric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy Incubation proposal
Date Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:36:45 GMT
2015-03-11 21:24 GMT+01:00 Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org>:

> Is the groovy project aware that (to my knowledge) the coding has to happen
> on ASF infrastructure? You won't be able to use the github web UI for
> merging PRs for example, because currently the ASF only mirrors git
> repositories from git.apache.org to github.
>
> Yes, we are aware (and TBH a bit worried about it) of it, but we hope that
it will be minor inconvenience. In particular GitHub has proved to be a
very effective tool to bring new contributors and we fear that having the
Groovy project in the middle of a ton of other projects in the "apache"
organization will reduce the number of PRs we receive, but I guess this is
a price to pay.

I'm very excited about this project, and will definitively be on board if
> groovy enters incubation.
>
> Thanks!

> Benedikt
>
> 2015-03-11 21:11 GMT+01:00 Cédric Champeau <cedric.champeau@gmail.com>:
>
> > A good answer to this is to take a look at who actually contributed for
> the
> > past 4 years:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/graphs/contributors?from=2011-01-01&to=2015-03-11&type=c
> > and you will see that there are not so many regular contributors. GitHub
> > helped us a lot recently to have more contributions, from simple typos to
> > complex bug fixes, but one should not forget that a contribution in
> GitHub
> > doesn't mean that the author is a committer : it's just that authors are
> > preserved.
> >
> > While we have a lot of contributors, only a few of us have a deep
> knowledge
> > of Groovy internals. We will certainly encourage regular contributors to
> > become committers (we already think of some), as long as those are
> > following quality standards, take care of important things like
> maintaining
> > backwards compatibility etc... We had more than 5 committers in the past,
> > but lots of them just stopped pushing code, for various reasons. In the
> end
> > I would be the first pleased to see more committers, but meritocracy is
> > also important. And to be clear, we do not think only about code:
> > contributions like documentation or tests are also very important.
> >
> > 2015-03-11 20:17 GMT+01:00 Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>:
> >
> > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:08 PM, jan i <jani@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > Having just skimmed the proposal, that in general look good, one
> thing
> > > > caught my eye.
> > > >
> > > > The proposal talks several places about a vibrant community and the
> > > initial
> > > > commiters are only 5.
> > >
> > > This, is a GREAT question! Thank you so much for raising it. While
> > > preparing a proposal I've struggled with the same issue, because
> looking
> > > at this: https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/graphs/contributors
> makes
> > > me wonder exactly the same thing.
> > >
> > > In the end, we decided to go ahead with the proposal the way it is and
> > > position
> > > the initial list of committers more as a PMC for the project.
> > >
> > > That still doesn't answer your (or mine! ;-)) question of what's the
> best
> > > way
> > > to make sure than anybody who feels like they have a stake in the
> project
> > > and have contributed in the past get invited.
> > >
> > > There are a few alternatives I could see, but I would really
> > > appreciate Incubator's
> > > collective wisdom on what would be the best way to proceed here given
> > > that Groovy is a very mature project with a lot of contributors in the
> > > past.
> > > Some of whom may or may not wish to keep contributing.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> http://github.com/britter
>

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