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: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Date Sun, 09 Jul 2017 12:37:55 GMT
Will the podling be progressing on a vote in time for the next board report
(7/19)? Please make sure you draft your proposal.  You can take a sample
draft from https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/fluo (it's all the way at
the bottom)

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:55 AM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks, John. Consider this mentor +1 then.
>
> On 7/5/17 7:03 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I have no concerns with Fluo's graduation based on
> the
> > conversation here.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:02 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >>> Hi Josh,
> >>>
> >>> I have some questions:
> >>>
> >>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
> >> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
> >>>>
> >>>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
> >> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I
> think
> >> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I
> see
> >> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
> >>>
> >>> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
> >> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
> >>
> >> Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
> >> active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
> >>
> >>>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings
to
> >> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
> >> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a
> difficult
> >> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
> >> building on top of given my view of the world).
> >>>>
> >>>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
> >> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
> >> that.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
> >> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
> >> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions
> about
> >> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest
> that
> >> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
> >> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
> >>>
> >>> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
> >> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly
> dependent
> >> on Accumulo?
> >>>
> >>> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
> >> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior
> conversation.)
> >>>
> >>
> >> Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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