lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Lucene.NET Community Status
Date Sat, 30 Oct 2010 16:55:16 GMT

On Oct 30, 2010, at 8:52 AM, George Aroush wrote:

> Hi Grant,
> 
> I'm perfectly fine going back to incubation, that will help us to
> re-validate this project and hopefully bring in some new blood.  If we do
> so, beside the current committers, who have had experience with Lucene.Net
> and the Apache way, who else do we bring in as new initial committers?  What
> criteria do we use?  Should we start with the current committers and in 3-6
> months add / remove from the list?

Here's the current list:
George Aroush george @ aroush.net
Işık YİĞİT (DIGY) digydigy @ gmail.com 
Doug Sale dsale @ myspace-inc.com 
Michael Garski mgarski @ myspace-inc.com

Seeing how Doug, Isik and Michael haven't responded, you might want to track them down.  I
think it is fine to see if they still want to participate, but I'd look for other people who
want to volunteer too.  I'd simply solicit names and add them to the Wiki proposal.  I don't
think there is any requirement beyond that for incubation.  What the project needs right now
is people who are willing to step up and act now.


> 
> Btw, sorry to post this to 3 different mailing list, but I hope by doing so
> it gets some extra visibility.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- George
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org] 
> Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 6:59 AM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Cc: general@lucene.apache.org; lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET Community Status
> 
> 
> On Oct 29, 2010, at 11:19 PM, George Aroush wrote:
> 
>> Hi Grant and all,
>> 
>> I will get engaged with the project again.  The way I see it, by the end
> of
>> the year, we must:
>> 
>> 1) Clean up the website, and / or
>> 2) Create an official release off the current trunk, and
>> 3) Sometimes next year, port the most current version of Java Lucene.
>> 
>> If by the end of the year, if we don't manage #1 and / or #2, Lucene.Net
>> should be at the mercy of Apache's PMC.
> 
> Please see the original email below.  You also need new blood contributing
> to the project.  One active committer for a project that has been around
> this long is not enough.  You also need a plan for self determination, i.e.
> to either become a top level project (i.e. lucenenet.apache.org or something
> like that) here at the ASF or for spinning out somewhere else under a new
> name.  This will be better for the project as you will then be guided by a
> PMC that is made up of the community members who have a stake in the
> project, as opposed to now where you have a PMC, other than George, that is
> largely unaware of Lucene.NET and has no stake in Lucene.NET and is not
> informed enough to make decisions about new committers, releases, etc. and
> likely isn't even capable of running Lucene.NET (I'm on a Mac, for
> instance.)   
> 
> In fact, if I were active in this community, I would put the self
> determination piece of the puzzle before all others because it has a number
> of effects that make 1, 2 and 3 easier for you.  Personally, I would go back
> to the Incubator with a proposal for re-entry there that adds at least 4-5
> new committers based on volunteers stepping up here.  Once you have 4-5 new
> committers, then you have people who can do the work to get a release out,
> clean up the website and, most importantly, learn how developing code at the
> ASF works.  You also then have the genesis of a PMC that makes for a
> sustainable project and one where you can get 3 binding PMC votes for a
> release (which you may not be able to do at the moment under Lucene simply
> because other than George, there are not any .NET programmers on the PMC who
> can verify the release is viable.)  
> 
> I can help you craft the proposal to go into the Incubator, as I feel it is
> part of my duties as Chair to see some resolve on this project, but beyond
> that I personally am not interested in being involved.  I do think there
> needs to be a .NET version of Lucene, though, so I wish you all the best of
> luck in keeping the project alive.
> 
> -Grant
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> The key for our success is for the community working together -- we can't
>> have few folks doing the heavy lifting of the project.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> -- George
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org] 
>> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 4:48 PM
>> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Cc: Lucene mailing list; lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Lucene.NET Community Status
>> 
>> FYI: This message was sent to the lucene-net-dev@lucene.a.o list on Oct.
> 25
>> and elicited zero replies.  I am sending it here in the hopes that some of
>> you will step forward and either bring this project back to life via going
>> back to the Incubator or we put it in the Apache Attic and someone can
> take
>> and maintain it somewhere else under a different name per the terms of the
>> Apache License.
>> 
>> ---
>> Hi .Netters,
>> 
>> The Lucene PMC would like to ask everyone involved with .NET if they might
>> chime in on the status of this project.  There hasn't been a commit since
>> July 2010 (and that one was trivial and there were only 2 in June) and
> there
>> seems to be very little activity on the dev mailing list.  There also has
>> not been a release in a long time.  This was brought up at the last Lucene
>> Board Report and it doesn't appear that there has been any action since.
> A
>> community should be able to withstand the loss of a single committer, but
>> here it appears that there are no longer any committers willing to work on
>> the project.
>> 
>> In order to remedy the situation, we would like the following things to be
>> done:
>> 1.  The community needs to show some (sustained) life.  Not just in code,
>> but in discussion of the project's future, etc.  We would expect the
>> committers to take a leadership role here.
>> 2. The community needs to do a real release that is voted on by the PMC.
>> 3. The webpage needs to be updated to reflect that those previous "source"
>> releases are not real releases and should be taken down.  Likewise, the
> news
>> section should not tout these non-releases as releases.  The website
> should
>> also meet the PMC Branding guidelines recently sent out.
>> 4. Identify some new blood for contributors/committers.  Or the current
>> committers need to step up more and take a lead role in the community.
>> 
>> We would like to see action on all of these things by the end of this
> year.
>> If they can't be met, there will be one of the following actions:
>> 1. Go back into Incubation
>> 2. Go into the Apache Attic.  If someone wants to take the code base and
>> fork it out as a project somewhere else under a new name that does not use
>> the Lucene trademark name (since that is owned by the ASF) than that is
>> perfectly acceptable under the Apache license.  
>> 
>> If the conditions can be met, we think that the project should spin itself
>> out as its own Top Level ASF project with its own PMC so that its future
>> direction can be set by the stakeholders of the project and not by the
>> larger Lucene project as a whole.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Grant Ingersoll
>> On behalf of the Lucene PMC=
>> 
> 
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
> http://www.lucidimagination.com
> 

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem docs using Solr/Lucene:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search


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