lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Troy Howard <thowar...@gmail.com>
Subject Request for cancellation of current vote regarding Lucene.Net status change
Date Thu, 30 Dec 2010 05:09:23 GMT
Dear Lucene PMC,

This email is to address the current vote by the Lucene PMC regarding
a change of status for the Lucene.Net sub-project and the general
future of that project.

The current process, which is moving towards a change of status for
the Lucene.Net project (either to the incubator or attic), seems to be
contrary to the interests and needs of the community surrounding the
project. Since the issue has come up, there has been a significant
response from the Lucene.Net community expressing their desire for
this not to happen and their willingness to contribute to the project
in order to see it move forward.

Unfortunately, the committers on the project have not responded in a
meaningful way to either the requests from the Lucene PMC or the
interest expressed by the Lucene.Net community. This does not show a
lack of vitality to the community or project, but rather a lack of
interest on the part of the current committers.

Let's have a look at who is on the current committer list:
- George Aroush
- DIGY
- Doug Sale
- Michael Garski

Of that list, the last two, Doug Sale and Michael Garski have been
uninvolved for the majority of 2010 both in terms of making commits to
source control and in terms of communication on the mailing list.

George has been largely uninvolved with the project since 2008.

DIGY has stated clearly and publicly that he is frustrated with being
the only developer on the project and has decided to no longer work on
the project because of this.

When the issue of a status change came up and the community called for
leadership, DIGY and George both took part in the discussion. George,
the defacto project leader, did not respond to community requests for
changes in the project vision, management or codebase, thereby
alienating a large part of the motivated potential contributors in the
community.

George has also been unresponsive, both to the PMC and the community
at large. Those contributors who have attempted to support the effort
to move forward with the project have not been able to engage him
despite their efforts. There was a general assumption that George
would either meet the needs expressed by the Lucene PMC through his
own efforts or coordinate effort by the community contributors to meet
those needs. Neither of those things have happened.

It is clear the George, like the other three committers, is not able
to meet the needs of the project, either due to a lack of interest,
time, or some other unknown factor.

So, of the four possible committers, all four are completely
unavailable and have displayed a lack of activity and lack of interest
in being part of the project.

This situation has led to a complete confusion in the community as to
how to move forward with the project. The would-be contributors either
do not know what to work to do (and thus have not contributed due to
lack of guidance), or have had their patches and contributions ignored
by the committers. Many of those would-be-contributors have simply
moved on and forked the project outside of the ASF due to their
inability to contribute.

This is following the pattern of 'Revolution' as defined in
http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#Revolution and detailed
by James Duncan Davison. Unfortunately none of the current committers
are involved in this process, and as such, this revolution is occuring
outside of ASF, rather than in ASF's source control. It also means
that these forks will never have the opportunity to be merged back
into the trunk.

There is a strong community around this project. There are numerous
other significant and active open source projects in the .NET space
which depend on Lucene.Net as a library, as well as countless
commercial products that depend on it. There is a strong community
interest in seeing this project move forward and remain vital and
active.

The sensible and correct action for the Lucene PMC is to remove all
four of the current committers from the Lucene.Net project, and
establish a vote for new committers to be assigned to the project from
the users community.

A change of status will not help this project or it's community in any
possible way. New committers, who are interested, motivated, and
responsive are what this project needs.

This is my personal request, but I believe that I speak for a
substantial portion of the Lucene.Net community by asking the Lucene
PMC to please cancel the current vote and address this problem in a
more appropriate and responsible manner.

Please grant the Lucene.Net community the power to be self-determined
by enabling it's active and motivated members to choose a new group of
committers.

On a related subject, it is notable that unlike other Lucene
sub-projects, Lucene.Net does not have representation within the
Lucene PMC, and as such, the PMC's decision making process is
occurring without any PMC member being directly involved with the
community or project. I further propose that once a new group of
committers is established for the Lucene.Net project that one of those
members be made a Lucene PMC member. This will assist the PMC in
better managing the project in the future.


Sincerely,
Troy Howard

Mime
View raw message