incubator-libcloud mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jerry Chen <>
Subject Re: [libcloud] Project needs for TLP.
Date Tue, 07 Dec 2010 22:27:37 GMT

On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Upayavira wrote:

> I think you (and Jed) are making interesting points.
> It was difficult for Libcloud to accept the Java port, and difficult for
> it not to.

Most eloquently put.

> I wonder how much interest there is in the Java code here. Is there
> enough to fork into a separate incubator podling? That would leave
> libcloud (python) to carry on with its own development at its own rate.

I think I've seen a couple of emails from Java Libcloud users but no one has stepped up to
the plate for contributing to the Java codebase. 

> Philip, I think your assessments are reasonable, but some of the
> approaches you suggest don't fit too well with an Apache style. We don't
> tend to assign roles to individuals (even if they often tend to take
> them). What I *would* encourage is folks other than Paul managing
> releases. 

Paul has been great and a driving force, especially for releases, but we do need to empower
other committers and contributors with the release procedure.

To wit:
- procedure/requirements for initiating a vote
- tagging release in SVN
- properly packaging
- updating PyPI, Debian/Ubuntu aptitude
- procedure for last-minute, post-release hotfixes

> Also, while IRC can be a useful tool, it can be difficult if you happen
> to be in the wrong timezone. (I've had times when I've had to join
> concalls at 1am because of US and Philippino participation. Not fun).

Overall I think increased activity on the mailing list or on IRC will be beneficial to the

> All it really takes is for other folks in the community to start firing
> forwards their ideas for how the project can grow and develop. Everyone
> in the community is free to take a lead, with or without a role!


> Upayavira 


> On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 11:55 -0500, "Schwartz, Philip Marc (LNG-BCT)"
> <> wrote:
>> Ant had valid concerns for not having libcloud go TLP and I feel we need
>> to discuss them along with a few other things that I feel are holding the
>> project.
>> Lets start with the project participation. Yes, Ant is right in the fact
>> that 90% of all interaction is handled by Paul at the moment and I think
>> this is something that should be discussed and a clear plan of action
>> should be outlined. Most other OSS projects I work with you see things a
>> set listing of project members and responsibilities along with a voting
>> community of core developers working on the project for all actions and
>> review of committed code/tagging.
>> I think this should be our first course of action, vote in the community
>> for yearly rotating positions for things like overall project management,
>> code management, documentation management, etc. This would probably clear
>> up most of Ant's concerns in its self. (also defining set roles for the
>> project that follow the Apache way would be good, ex:
>> The second part of this should be a set meeting schedule that could be
>> done in irc where we can get as many of the community using and
>> developers working on the project together to discuss the motion of the
>> project and goals for each release, Monthly 30 min to 1 hour irc meetings
>> might be more then enough for this.
>> Outside of project participation, there is one other topic that I think
>> need further discussion. This is the Java portion of libcloud which is
>> clearly not ready for TLP status. I would move for this to be removed
>> from the libcloud project for its own project.
>> In the past Paul has stated that libcloud is a reference spec with an
>> example implementation in Python. I think this is far from the case as
>> all of the specification comes from the current Python code base. At this
>> time it is more beneficial for libcloud to be a Python cloud library and
>> not a reference specification. Yes, this makes things a little hairy for
>> things based on what libcloud does, but that is why they are based on
>> libcloud and not part of libcloud which I think has been missed in
>> hindsight with the java code.
>> I would now move that for future development and needs for graduation, we
>> should discuss redefining libcloud as a python library only so we can
>> more finely focus on a defined library api that can be adapted for other
>> projects such as a java implementation to be based on.
>> Thank You,
>> Philip Schwartz
>> Software Engineering
>> LexisNexis RIAG
>> O - 561 999 4472
>> C - 954 290 4024
>> This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
>> information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is
>> protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should
>> delete this message.  Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
>> message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

View raw message