lucene-pylucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org>
Subject Re: AW: release votes
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:40:15 GMT

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014, Thomas Koch wrote:

> I don't agree that it is unimportant to make PyLucene releases. Without a
> ready-to-run software package the hurdles to use PyLucene are raised. It is
> already not quite simple (for beginners) to install PyLucene on the various
> platforms. Having a packaged release that is tested by some users provides a
> benefit to the community in my opinion.

I agree with you that making releases is important. However, when votes are 
called to actually make them, it's been hard to get voters to respond.

Anyone can vote. Anyone with an interest should vote. Three PMC votes are 
required to make a release happen, though. But any vote for or against is 
important, PMC or not. Lately, it's been hard to get the TWO extra PMC votes 
needed to make a release happen (since mine is cast when I cut the release 
candidate). I think this is in part _because_ no one else is showing an 
interest in the release and casting a vote either.

> However I can understand your arguments - there has been little feedback on
> your release announcements on the list recently. On the other hand there are
> frequent discussions about PyLucene on the list so I don't think the
> interest has declined. Did you check the number of downloads of the PyLucene
> distributions (if this is possible at all - due to the distributed releases
> on the apache mirrors ...)? This would be a more accurate indicator from my
> point of view.

I have no idea about the number of downloads of PyLucene. JCC, however, has 
gotten over 2700 downloads in the past month:
   https://pypi.python.org/pypi/JCC/2.19

> I must also admit that I did never understand the voting process in detail -
> i.e. who are the PMC members and what impact have  votes of non PMC users.
> Maybe some more transparency and another "call for action" would help to
> raise awareness in the community.

There are at least three classes in the Apache meritocracy:
   - users, developers, contributors but not committers
   - committers, ie developers who can commit patches to the project
   - PMC members, ie project committers that sit on the PMC (project
     management committee)
For more information, please see:
   https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html

By the rules guiding the release of Apache projects, three PMC votes are 
necessary to release a tarball to the world.
The list of Lucene committers is visible here:
   http://lucene.apache.org/whoweare.html
Scroll down that list for the PMC membership.

Andi..

>
> Just my thoughts...
>
>
> regards,
> Thomas
> --
> OrbiTeam Software GmbH & Co. KG
> http://www.orbiteam.de
>
>
>> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Andi Vajda [mailto:vajda@apache.org]
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. April 2014 02:28
>> An: pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Betreff: release votes
>>
>>
>>   Hi all,
>>
>> Given the tiny amount of interest the pylucene releases create, it's maybe
>> become unimportant to actually make PyLucene releases ?
>>
>> The release votes have had an increasingly difficult time to garner the
> three
>> required PMC votes to pass. Non PMC users are also eerily quiet.
>>
>> Maybe the time has come to switch to a different model:
>>
>>   - when a Lucene release happens, a PyLucene branch gets created with all
>>     the necessary changes to build successfully and pass all tests against
>>     this Lucene release
>>   - users interested in PyLucene check out that branch
>>   - done
>>
>>   - no more releases, no more votes
>>
>> JCC can continue to be released to PyPI independently as it is today.
>> That doesn't require any voting anyway (?).
>>
>> What do readers of this list think ?
>>
>> Andi..
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/mixed (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message