incubator-libcloud mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [libcloud] Re: Removal of the Java bindings
Date Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:59:20 GMT
I agree with some of those points, and i'll point out again some
emails where i have suggested things that would help [1], [2] along
with the recent one on libcloud-private about the PMC makeup. I think
all these recent discussion around voting, releases,
organization/process doc etc are great, people are engaging in
discussion and learning from that.

What are the plans for the next release, if thats not going to be too
far off could it be used to get others up to speed on the release
process?

   ...ant

[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-libcloud/201009.mbox/%3CAANLkTinuS-tJdhsj3QcOhLEccHmycc-rL1JgAhg_f1v0@mail.gmail.com%3E

[2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-libcloud/201011.mbox/%3CAANLkTim8ViOH3-D9TVbpUbgySTjWXns-RRv_4iSELw06@mail.gmail.com%3E


On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Frankly it's not your vote that this project is trying to resolve,
> it's Ant's -1.  The fundamental problem is that nobody seems to
> understand the basis for Ant's vote,  Ant has been less than
> forthcoming about what it would take to change his mind, and
> the rest of the project is grasping at straws trying to figure
> out what to do.
>
> That's not what mentoring at Apache is supposed to be about.  My
> sole concern with this project is in how it arrives at its decisions,
> not in the outcomes.  Healthy projects take advantage of their
> diversity by sampling opinions ahead of time and trying to form a
> consensus *before* putting things to a vote.
>
>
> Yes there is tension about the java code, but it's nothing that a
> dozen other Apache projects haven't dealt with in one way or another.
> Crafting bylaws has nothing to do with the problem, the project needs
> to construct productive working relationships between committers with
> different interests, while realizing that there should be agreement on
> what the common goals of the project are.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk>
>> To: libcloud@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Tue, December 14, 2010 9:53:55 AM
>> Subject: Re: [libcloud] Re: Removal of the Java bindings
>>
>> I have been thinking about this, and trying to address what my issue is.
>> Then  I read the following on the wave-dev list:
>>
>> "It might be worth looking at  what Lucene does vis-a-vis language ports:
>>  It
>> looks like the ports (to  Python, .NET, C, etc.) are separate projects,
>> but
>> the main lucene.apache.org page  provides convenient links to each  of
>> them.
>> <http://lucene.apache.org/>
>>
>> I don't see any reason  something similar couldn't happen with Wave...
>> take
>> the C# Server that was  being discussed, for example... it could enter
>> the
>> Incubator as a project  in it's own right, with the two projects
>> providing
>> mutual links to each  other, and with a "gentleman's agreement" between
>> the
>> developers to  consult as necessary to deal with protocol compatibility,
>> etc.
>>
>> Just a  thought..."
>>
>> I felt like this entirely captures what is going on with  libcloud, and
>> if _this_ is the intention as to how libcloud operates, my  issue in
>> regard to the Java impl goes away.
>>
>> The java impl can stay as  it is, as a simple incomplete port in a
>> sandbox. If it reaches a sufficient  level, it can become a 'clone
>> subproject', or, be extracted out into its own  project, whether under
>> incubation or as a TLP depending on community  maturity.
>>
>> The remaining issue expressed by Ant was regarding  over-reliance on one
>> person, Paul.
>>
>> I have mulled further on this, and  have also come to the conclusion
>> that, for me, this is a non-issue.
>>
>> I  have viewed Paul as a driving force in the project. However, take him
>> away,  and we still have active participation from others (maybe not
>> 'lead' but  participation, and ASF projects do not require a leader  to
>> succeed).
>>
>> Also, reviewing some simple metrics show that he is not  over-dominant:
>> <50% of commits[1] and a small proportion of Jira  issues[2].
>>
>> Therefore, were this vote presented to the incubator PMC, I  would now
>> vote +1.
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>>
>> [1]  http://www.ohloh.net/p/libcloud/contributors
>> [2]
>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ConfigureReport.jspa?versionId=-1&issueStatus=all&selectedProjectId=12311030&reportKey=com.sourcelabs.jira.plugin.report.contributions%3Acontributionreport&Next=Next
>>t
>>
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message