incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Edward J. Yoon" <>
Subject Re: Apache Metrics, Not Apache Humans
Date Mon, 16 Nov 2015 01:09:19 GMT
momentary issue or concern -- though a more general concern about how
Apache should evolve.

I personally think that the complex human emotions is important
evolutionary mechanism. The machine or math can't.

On Monday, 16 November 2015, Marko Rodriguez <> wrote:

> Hi,
> I was talking with Daniel Gruno and wrote the following ideas to him. Note
> that these are just ideas and not based on any real momentary issue or
> concern -- though a more general concern about how Apache should evolve.
> Apache should NOT use a binary "podling" / "top-level" model. All projects
> should simply have a "health score" and that health score is derived from
> measurables. Because of Apache Infrastructure's centralized server model
> (email lists, version control, distributions, homepages, etc.), it  has the
> ability to gather metrics such as, for example, the distribution of pushes
> to the repository, the branch factor of the mailing list, the centrality of
> the project in the Central Maven repository dependency graph, the number of
> non-sequisters (dead-end conversations) in the email chain, the length of
> discussions in JIRA, etc. etc. Which metrics are important? Who care --
> just make up things to glean from the wealth of information you already
> have access to. Watch...
> Next, the Apache members subjectively say which projects they think are
> "good" (healthy). This can even be a global vote including everyone in the
> world and (should be) dynamic over time as projects evolve with time.
> Either way, lets say, the ranking says Apache Hadoop, Apache Solr, Apache
> Commons, etc. are the (collective subjective's) "best" Apache projects.
> Now, there should exist a multi-dimensional projection of the
> aforementioned gleaned statistics what will have Hadoop, Solr, Commons,
> etc. close to one another in metric-space (clustered). Likewise, low
> ranking projects should be close to one another in this space and far from
> Hadoop, Solr, Commons, etc. Find that projection and that is your "healthy
> metric space."
> From here, all Apache projects have a computed "healthy" score(s) and when
> users go to download, lets say, Lucene, they go: "Cool. This is a healthy
> project." (it has a HEALTH.txt file distributed with it, lets say). What
> that means is that Lucene, at that release was in the "healthy" cluster of
> the metric space. This model has various benefits:
>         1. There is no need to have philosophical arguments (not grounded
> in measurables) about what rules a project should follow (bounded by law).
>                 - Perhaps a project that is exclusive, but is X is still
> in the "healthy" subspace.
>                 - Perhaps having bad documentation is a "unhealthy" even
> though Apache doesn't care about documentation.
>                 - Perhaps too much discussion causes a project to become
> "unhealthy."
>                 - Perhaps … who knows? … let the statistics do the talking.
>                 -  Apache becomes a breeding ground for different models
> of open source (bounded by law), not just "The Apache Way."
>                         - And these models are measurable! Let us study
> the act of open source.
>         2. "Top-level" projects can fall from grace.
>                 - Currently, all "top-level" projects are "equal." This
> should by dynamic as the mighty do fall.
>                 - It is possible for what are now "podlings" to be
> "healthy" as they simply are coming into Apache.
>                         - "The student is the master."
>                 - Hadoop 1.2.1 might be the healthiest version of Hadoop
> (as I tend to believe). "Hadoop" is not a thing eternal.
>         3. Less work for people.
>                 - No more VOTEing on graduation.
>                 - No more amorphous aesthetic arguments about "The Apache
> Way."
>                 - No more long winded contradictory documentation about
> how things should be done (bounded by law).
> The Apache Way should be about metrics, not about philosophy as different
> paths lead to the same mountain top <--- See! Is that random Buddhist
> saying that everyone just "believes" even true? :) Get the human out of the
> loop!
> Thanks for reading,
> Marko.
> P.S. The same should hold true for educational degrees. I graduate and now
> forever I'm an expert in computers? Medical doctors too! A 90 year old
> doctor can do surgery on me?!?!… Binary graduation is not "real." Metrics,
> metrics, metrics --- we live in a world where this is possible. For every
> "thing" good comes and goes, up and down…

Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon

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