incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2016 22:43:36 GMT
Cos,

Did you mean this section?

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community

John

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:41 PM Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org> 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.
>
> 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
>
>

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