incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Policy Question: GA for GitHub for Podlings
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2016 02:30:09 GMT
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:10 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm +0.5 for this right now.  There's some challenges I would like to see
> answered to be able to move forward on this.
>
> - Who controls the ACLs?  I have some strong opinions of the ACL.
> Specifically, when the podling joins the incubator, I expect that the
> "OpenWhisk" organization be handed over to us, and all non-IPMC members are
> removed.  Once we receive ICLAs members are granted access back.  Or the
> equivalent - we create a new "ApacheOpenWhisk" organization.
>
> - All committers who are in the "incubator" group are granted write access
> to OpenWhisk

I have strong opinions on this subject too, and they don't match
yours.  It happens.  :-)

As one of the member of the IPMC, I would very much like to see
podlings set up *EXACTLY* like PMCs, albeit with oversight by mentors.
That means non-IPMC members are NOT removed, and committers in the
"incubator" group are NOT added, only mentors.

That being said, as the person who volunteered to set up LDAP for
podlings, I will set aside my preference in favor of the consensus of
the IPMC.  Logistically, however, giving every member of the incubator
group write access to an existing GitHub repository would be a
nightmare.  Granting mentors (a much smaller set) would be a smaller
set.

> - the ASF still needs to maintain records of the revision history.  I would
> like to understand the plan to provide this history.

Here's an example:

https://matt.apache.org/pushlogs.html?repo=whimsy

> I'm not very comfortable with a policy that allows podlings to do things
> they can't do as TLPs.  This is setting up for major delays in graduation.

The goal, for quite some time now, has been to resolve GitHub as a
Master one way or another.  It is time to do so.  If the conclusion is
that GitHub as a Master is not to be, OpenWhisk will need to be
migrated at that time.  Until then, there is no reason to migrate it
only to potentially migrate it back.

> John

- Sam Ruby

> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:23 PM Chris Mattmann <mattmann@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As some of you may have seen the OpenWhisk podling being discussed now has
>> requested to use GitHub as its primary master. Greg Stein our ASF Infra
>> Admin
>> has OK’ed this for OpenWhisk iff the IPMC is OK with it.
>>
>> I ask now:
>>
>> 1. Is the IPMC OK with this for OpenWhisk?
>> 2. Is the IPMC OK with this in general availability for Podlings?
>>
>> I am +1 on both (IPMC hat on).
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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