incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2016 23:12:27 GMT
And here as well, with the precise specification of at a minimum 3
independent committers:

> The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally
independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success
of the project)

http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Graduation+Requirements

Martijn



On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbedooh@apache.org> wrote:
> On 11/08/2016 11:43 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
>> Besides, last time I checked there's no such thing as "diversity requirement"
>> in the graduation.  It is indeed being asked here and there, but so far it
>> isn't an official IPMC requirement.
>
> It's very prominently displayed in our graduation guideline.
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community
>
>>
>> And I'd hate to make a "diversity scape-goat" out of the project that has
>> created a very welcome environment!
>>
>> Cos
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 02:14PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/07/2016 10:05 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbedooh@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was looking at Snoot, and some figures jumped at me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is the Podling (and the IPMC) satisfied that there is no concern
with
>>>>>>> people affiliated with a single company providing more than 90%
of all
>>>>>>> commits over the past year and, as far as I can tell, the vast
majority
>>>>>>> of tickets and email, as well as a 73% stake in the proposed
PMC?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is the IPMC satisfied that, should this company opt to not further
spend
>>>>>>> resources on this project, that the project would still be as
viable?
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've observed this project since it joined the incubator and they've
worked
>>>>> hard to create an open and welcoming community and to fix all the issues
>>>>> raised that could be barriers to their graduation.
>>>>>
>>>>> In terms of percentages, these things have been debated previously in
>>>>> graduation of projects such as Ignite, Flume, Tez etc and I'm not going
to
>>>>> repeat the arguments from those discussions. Geode would be better with
>>>>> served with a wider community, but I think what matters is 1) have they
>>>>> demonstrated the behaviors we expect and 2) are they moving in the right
>>>>> direction. Geode is a great community and a pleasure to be involved with
>>>>> and I would say yes to both of these. I believe they are going in the
right
>>>>> direction to make this project less dependent on one company and except
to
>>>>> change the percentages you've pointed out, theres no purpose left for
them
>>>>> being in the incubator. They've shown that they can manage themselves
and
>>>>> theres enough independent oversight to mitigate concerns which is why
I
>>>>> think we should vote for them to graduate.
>>>>
>>>> Given the discussions around single-vendor projects that are raging on
>>>> board@ I would have to agree with Daniel's concerns here. Projects that
>>>> are heavily dominated by a single vendor/company/organization
>>>> historically cause problems over time.
>>>
>>> I think that other discussion addresses a very different set of problems.
>>>
>>>> Is there a huge rush to get this project graduated?
>>>
>>> I'd rather flip your argument around and say: at this point sitting in the
>>> Incubator adds no value to the project nor does it teach anything
>>> new or useful to its PPMC or a community at large.
>>>
>>>> Surely we serve the
>>>> Foundation, and this project, better, by ensuring that this problem
>>>> (and, yes, it's a problem) is addressed before we grant them TLP status?
>>>
>>> I disagree. The Incubator is a place to make sure that the community
>>> (regardless of its composition) truly understands and practices the
>>> "Apache Way". As has been suggested on this thread by a number of
>>> votes from project's mentors and IPMC members embedded in the
>>> Geode community that mission has been accomplished.
>>>
>>> I see no reason to hold the project hostage over the diversity requirement
>>> simply because it is pointless for IPMC, project and the foundation.
>>>
>>>> I'm personally less concerned with the sustainability of the project
>>>> should the company opt out of working on the project, and more concerned
>>>> with the kind of monoculture "we own it" problems that we're starting to
>>>> see crop up in other projects that were allowed to graduate without
>>>> building the community first.
>>>
>>> Then you really should be voting "yes" on this thread. There's a good number
>>> of us on IPMC who believe that "we own it" is really not a problem with this
>>> community.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roman.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>



-- 
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com

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


Mime
View raw message