You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by jan i <ja...@apache.org> on 2015/09/05 13:42:24 UTC
[NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani,
louis, pmkelly
Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache
Corinthia.
I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in
apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably prevented
the meltdown.
The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home.
rgds
jan i.
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert
> this melt-down....
FWIW, I won't be able to do much email in the next few days, I'll try
to catchup with this once I'm more active again.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org>.
Am 06.09.2015 19:43, schrieb Peter Kelly:
>> On 6 Sep 2015, at 11:22 pm, Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 06.09.2015 04:22, schrieb Dave Fisher: [...]
>>> Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow
>>> the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL.
>>> If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you
>>> know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked
>>> out then at least it would help other projects.
>>
>> can you explain the case a bit? Do you link statically? What is the
>> license?
>
> We wanted to use Qt, the open source version of which is LGPL. All
> other suitable candidates we could find were similar; GTK is LGPL,
> and wxWidgets has a license that is very close to LGPL. We also
> needed to use WebKit, regardless of the toolkit involved, and that is
> (mostly I think) LGPL also.
I would have thought about wxWidgets as well... true the license is
basically LGPL, but "works in binary form may be distributed on the
user's own terms" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WxWidgets#License). I
would assume that allows the binary to be Apache Licensed for example.
But Webkit blows it up again, yes.
> There was some debate about whether or not it was ok to write an
> application which used Qt, though we did not propose including any of
> the actual Qt source code in the release artefacts. It would be used
> as an external library, dynamically linked, similar to how many
> programs use glibc.
my position on this is, it is ok as long as qt is not part of the
binary, since then it has to be part of the system... And I think you
mean this as well. Though, I doubt that works for QT under windows. GTK+
maybe, once the windows runtime becomes available again.
> An assertion was made in the discussion that if we cannot develop our
> app without using Qt, it should not be part of the project (I assume
> this same argument would have been made if we had chosen one of the
> others above). Given that this app was a major component (though by
> no means all) of what we planned to do, it seemed that if that
> argument was valid (and I don’t think it was, but I’m still not
> sure), we would have to do so outside of ASF.
I think it would be bad to have the UI and the functionality separate -
even if the UI part would be so much bigger. But that would allow other
applications to use it as library independent of the editor. But given,
that you are supposed to build a community and that the community most
likely will want to use the editor in the beginning... I find that
decision reasonable. Is licensing the project under LGPL an option?
Afaik apache does not like that very much, but could allow it.
> There were numerous other factors involved with our design to resign,
> mostly involving personal disputes among PPMC members which I won’t
> get into here out of respect for all involved. But the discussion
> about licensing and implications for the project was one of the
> factors, and certainly caused a division in the community.
Personal disputes will happen, just belongs to life.... imho. For me the
licensing problem would be enough to move away from apache in your
case... if LPGPL is not option for the project.
[...]
bye blackdrag
--
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org>.
> On 7 Sep 2015, at 1:17 am, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 06.09.2015 19:43, Peter Kelly wrote:
>> If it’s not possible to write apps using LGPL libraries as part of apache projects,
>
> I expect you did get to read this page:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
> It explains why we cannot include code under certain libraries in our
> releases. It's fine to have optional dependencies on code under one of
> these licenses, such that the user can include them when they build
> binaries from our sources. But "optional" means that the absence of such
> a module doesn't affect the core functionality. If the core
> functionality is to be a user interface, then you'd have to find an
> appropriately-licenses UI toolkit.
>
> I'm not aware of any such toolkit that's compatible with ALv2 ... which
> is a bit of a pain.
Indeed. And I did read that page at the time and come away with an understanding that’s essentially what you explained, though I think the page could be a lot clearer (a direct statement like “You cannot link against LGPL libraries” would go a long way to avoiding ambiguity).
My hope (and those of some others on the project) was that we could make our editor app an optional component - there are other parts of the project which are very much useful in and of themselves. The Qt editor is only part of what we had planned (or I should say, have planned, since we’re still going ahead with it, just outside of ASF), but we also were working on a web-based editor which would not use any LGPL code or that of any other incompatible licenses.
The policy raises the rather tricky question of what can reasonably be considered “optional”. For a project with say three components, one of which inherently requires an LGPL library, should the latter considered optional? Arguments could be made in both ways, but on balance, I suspect probably not.
LGPL allows use in commercial applications, and e.g. WebKit (which is LGPL) has been used in Safari, Chrome, and countless other closed-source projects. I sort of understand the reasoning behind it’s prohibition; I don’t agree with it, but nonetheless it’s considered a resolved issue. I wish I’d realised this coming into incubator, since we’d planned a Qt component from the start, but it’s not the end of the world - the project will continue on GitHub, where we are free as a community to make our own decisions about such matters.
—
Dr Peter M. Kelly
pmkelly@apache.org
PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key>
(fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 06.09.2015 19:43, Peter Kelly wrote:
> If it’s not possible to write apps using LGPL libraries as part of apache projects,
I expect you did get to read this page:
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
It explains why we cannot include code under certain libraries in our
releases. It's fine to have optional dependencies on code under one of
these licenses, such that the user can include them when they build
binaries from our sources. But "optional" means that the absence of such
a module doesn't affect the core functionality. If the core
functionality is to be a user interface, then you'd have to find an
appropriately-licenses UI toolkit.
I'm not aware of any such toolkit that's compatible with ALv2 ... which
is a bit of a pain.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
Licensing is always a thorny issue.
In general, http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional> says that you can use libraries under licenses such as the LGPL for optional dependencies. This is so that user’s can use your project in its base mode with no “surprises”.
However, if the library is something that you would expect to be already installed on the platform(s) you support that is a different story. See http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#platform <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#platform>.
If someone can take your work, modify it, and then attach whatever license they want to the combined work then whatever you are doing is probably OK.
Ralph
> On Sep 6, 2015, at 10:43 AM, Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 6 Sep 2015, at 11:22 pm, Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org> wrote:
>>
>> Am 06.09.2015 04:22, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> [...]
>>> Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects.
>>
>> can you explain the case a bit? Do you link statically? What is the license?
>
> We wanted to use Qt, the open source version of which is LGPL. All other suitable candidates we could find were similar; GTK is LGPL, and wxWidgets has a license that is very close to LGPL. We also needed to use WebKit, regardless of the toolkit involved, and that is (mostly I think) LGPL also.
>
> There was some debate about whether or not it was ok to write an application which used Qt, though we did not propose including any of the actual Qt source code in the release artefacts. It would be used as an external library, dynamically linked, similar to how many programs use glibc.
>
> An assertion was made in the discussion that if we cannot develop our app without using Qt, it should not be part of the project (I assume this same argument would have been made if we had chosen one of the others above). Given that this app was a major component (though by no means all) of what we planned to do, it seemed that if that argument was valid (and I don’t think it was, but I’m still not sure), we would have to do so outside of ASF.
>
> There were numerous other factors involved with our design to resign, mostly involving personal disputes among PPMC members which I won’t get into here out of respect for all involved. But the discussion about licensing and implications for the project was one of the factors, and certainly caused a division in the community.
>
> If it’s not possible to write apps using LGPL libraries as part of apache projects, then this seems to pretty much rule out any cross-platform native desktop apps, unless you write your own toolkit. I realise OpenOffice has it’s own custom toolkit which is still used for historical reasons, but I don’t think that can adapt well to mobile platforms, so other than that that there don’t seem to be any viable choices which could work with the policy.
>
> —
> Dr Peter M. Kelly
> pmkelly@apache.org
>
> PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key>
> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
>
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org>.
> On 6 Sep 2015, at 11:22 pm, Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org> wrote:
>
> Am 06.09.2015 04:22, schrieb Dave Fisher:
> [...]
>> Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects.
>
> can you explain the case a bit? Do you link statically? What is the license?
We wanted to use Qt, the open source version of which is LGPL. All other suitable candidates we could find were similar; GTK is LGPL, and wxWidgets has a license that is very close to LGPL. We also needed to use WebKit, regardless of the toolkit involved, and that is (mostly I think) LGPL also.
There was some debate about whether or not it was ok to write an application which used Qt, though we did not propose including any of the actual Qt source code in the release artefacts. It would be used as an external library, dynamically linked, similar to how many programs use glibc.
An assertion was made in the discussion that if we cannot develop our app without using Qt, it should not be part of the project (I assume this same argument would have been made if we had chosen one of the others above). Given that this app was a major component (though by no means all) of what we planned to do, it seemed that if that argument was valid (and I don’t think it was, but I’m still not sure), we would have to do so outside of ASF.
There were numerous other factors involved with our design to resign, mostly involving personal disputes among PPMC members which I won’t get into here out of respect for all involved. But the discussion about licensing and implications for the project was one of the factors, and certainly caused a division in the community.
If it’s not possible to write apps using LGPL libraries as part of apache projects, then this seems to pretty much rule out any cross-platform native desktop apps, unless you write your own toolkit. I realise OpenOffice has it’s own custom toolkit which is still used for historical reasons, but I don’t think that can adapt well to mobile platforms, so other than that that there don’t seem to be any viable choices which could work with the policy.
—
Dr Peter M. Kelly
pmkelly@apache.org
PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key>
(fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
I am in the same boat as Alex with regard to QT, but Apache Pivot also has a similar goal.
Ralph
> On Sep 7, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> Apologies if I’m way off base here as I’m not familiar with Corinthia or
> QT Editor. If Corinthia were to develop the web-based editor mentioned
> upthread and make that the preferred/recommended editor for the project,
> does that make the QT Editor optional enough for Apache?
>
> <shameless-plug>Apache Flex is a UI Toolkit for web apps as well as
> desktop and mobile apps and the community is working on a version that
> outputs HTML/JS/CSS that can be consumed by Apache Cordova to target
> multiple platforms.</shameless-plug>
>
> -Alex
>
> On 9/7/15, 2:37 AM, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 7, 2015 4:12 PM, "Jochen Theodorou" <bl...@gmx.org> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I am not sure that approach is realistic. I mean, if you say it must be
>> optional and not required, then there must be an existing alternative. And
>> that alternative must be not LGPL. If there is such a toolkit, then why
>> not
>> go with that right away? The project has to manage its resources well.
>>
>> Exactly. Without an alternative, then you have a pile of code that doesn't
>> meet any user expectations.
>>
>> If it can be released as a library, for downstream users to produce an
>> editor, then okay. But an releasing an editor with no UI is kind of a
>> non-starter. :-(
>>
>> Given the UI landscape, and its licensing, I can see why Corinthia would
>> like to host elsewhere. One day, we'll see some permissive UI
>> libraries....
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -g
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Apologies if I’m way off base here as I’m not familiar with Corinthia or
QT Editor. If Corinthia were to develop the web-based editor mentioned
upthread and make that the preferred/recommended editor for the project,
does that make the QT Editor optional enough for Apache?
<shameless-plug>Apache Flex is a UI Toolkit for web apps as well as
desktop and mobile apps and the community is working on a version that
outputs HTML/JS/CSS that can be consumed by Apache Cordova to target
multiple platforms.</shameless-plug>
-Alex
On 9/7/15, 2:37 AM, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sep 7, 2015 4:12 PM, "Jochen Theodorou" <bl...@gmx.org> wrote:
>>...
>> I am not sure that approach is realistic. I mean, if you say it must be
>optional and not required, then there must be an existing alternative. And
>that alternative must be not LGPL. If there is such a toolkit, then why
>not
>go with that right away? The project has to manage its resources well.
>
>Exactly. Without an alternative, then you have a pile of code that doesn't
>meet any user expectations.
>
>If it can be released as a library, for downstream users to produce an
>editor, then okay. But an releasing an editor with no UI is kind of a
>non-starter. :-(
>
>Given the UI landscape, and its licensing, I can see why Corinthia would
>like to host elsewhere. One day, we'll see some permissive UI
>libraries....
>
>Cheers,
>-g
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Sep 7, 2015 4:12 PM, "Jochen Theodorou" <bl...@gmx.org> wrote:
>...
> I am not sure that approach is realistic. I mean, if you say it must be
optional and not required, then there must be an existing alternative. And
that alternative must be not LGPL. If there is such a toolkit, then why not
go with that right away? The project has to manage its resources well.
Exactly. Without an alternative, then you have a pile of code that doesn't
meet any user expectations.
If it can be released as a library, for downstream users to produce an
editor, then okay. But an releasing an editor with no UI is kind of a
non-starter. :-(
Given the UI landscape, and its licensing, I can see why Corinthia would
like to host elsewhere. One day, we'll see some permissive UI libraries....
Cheers,
-g
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org>.
Am 07.09.2015 03:11, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
> I can speak to the specific case.
>
> The desire is to adopt Qt as the best-choice, most-cross-platform GUI
> framework for Corinthia on the desktop. The non-commercial,
> open-source license for Qt is LGPL/GPL. See
> <http://www.qt.io/download-open-source/>.
>
> As I understand it, a second-thought alternative to full-up
> dependence on Qt is to make an experimental implementation that
> employs a wrapper API under which a Qt-specific integration layer is
> introduced. The Qt integration layer is meant to be optionally
> replaceable by an alternative one and corresponding framework under
> the wrapper API. The wrapper API and integration layer for any
> functionally-equivalent integration/replacement is TBD. A cautionary
> concern was raised about the prudence of having an
> optional-replacement of an LGPL dependence rather than an
> optionally-employable LGPL dependence.
>
> No specific proposal or request for any sort of exception is at
> legal-discuss or the LEGAL JIRA.
I am not sure that approach is realistic. I mean, if you say it must be
optional and not required, then there must be an existing alternative.
And that alternative must be not LGPL. If there is such a toolkit, then
why not go with that right away? The project has to manage its resources
well.
Also I am not fully understanding the problem I guess. It can't be
source problem, as long as the LGPL source is not included. compiling
against an public available LGPL source for dynamic linking itself can
also not be the problem. I do see a problem in the distribution of the
dynamic linked library. But if you do not distribute it and expect the
system to have it, then it should be no deal breaker. I mean otherwise
you could not compile against glibc or example.
And thinking this further... assuming QT is optional somehow. Why is it
then suddenly ok to distribute it in the convenience binary? Imho it is
not, even then.
Legal makes a difference for language/platform lgpl code. But why I
don't understand. A ticket for LEGAL in that matter would be good, but I
think that should be done by a member of the corinthia project. As I
know legal, it will depend on the special case and there won't be a
general answer.
bye blackdrag
--
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
I can speak to the specific case.
The desire is to adopt Qt as the best-choice, most-cross-platform GUI framework for Corinthia on the desktop. The non-commercial, open-source license for Qt is LGPL/GPL. See <http://www.qt.io/download-open-source/>.
As I understand it, a second-thought alternative to full-up dependence on Qt is to make an experimental implementation that employs a wrapper API under which a Qt-specific integration layer is introduced. The Qt integration layer is meant to be optionally replaceable by an alternative one and corresponding framework under the wrapper API. The wrapper API and integration layer for any functionally-equivalent integration/replacement is TBD. A cautionary concern was raised about the prudence of having an optional-replacement of an LGPL dependence rather than an optionally-employable LGPL dependence.
No specific proposal or request for any sort of exception is at legal-discuss or the LEGAL JIRA.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Jochen Theodorou [mailto:blackdrag@gmx.org]
Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2015 09:23
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Am 06.09.2015 04:22, schrieb Dave Fisher:
[...]
> Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects.
can you explain the case a bit? Do you link statically? What is the license?
bye blackdrag
--
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org>.
Am 06.09.2015 04:22, schrieb Dave Fisher:
[...]
> Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects.
can you explain the case a bit? Do you link statically? What is the license?
bye blackdrag
--
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Marvin,
Very true. I am sorry that we did not come to the IPMC sooner. Perhaps after my second attempt to cool things. Maybe a mentor should use frustration to determine when ask for help. Maybe it should not be private@. What if there was a mentor@ private ML explicitly for this help? Mentor confidential.
I think the Incubator being separate from ComDev may also be an issue. It can take time to grow a community and learn the balance between policy and pace of conversation. Apache can not be only policy. To many in the podling it began to feel like that - only policy. People asked for that to cool.
Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 5, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access
>> within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he
>> should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay.
>
> Ted is doing what he can, and it's only been a few days. We are all
> volunteers and do not always have the freedom to drop what we are
> doing to give Incubator matters our full attention.
>
>> To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call
>> from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a
>> reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help
>> the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I
>> was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations.
>
> What I wish everyone involved would strive to remember is that
> personnel conflicts are inherently difficult and draining, that
> mistakes are often made and responses often poorly calibrated, and
> that there are real people receiving these emails who may experience
> intense emotions as they read them.
>
> PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well.
>
> Marvin Humphrey
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>
wrote:
> PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well.
>
Such imperfections are not visible to humans.
At the least, it is pretty damned good. Thanks.
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Marvin,
Very true. I am sorry that we did not come to the IPMC sooner. Perhaps after my second attempt to cool things. Maybe a mentor should use frustration to determine when ask for help. Maybe it should not be private@. What if there was a mentor@ private ML explicitly for this help? Mentor confidential.
I think the Incubator being separate from ComDev may also be an issue. It can take time to grow a community and learn the balance between policy and pace of conversation. Apache can not be only policy. To many in the podling it began to feel like that - only policy. People asked for that to cool.
Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 5, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access
>> within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he
>> should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay.
>
> Ted is doing what he can, and it's only been a few days. We are all
> volunteers and do not always have the freedom to drop what we are
> doing to give Incubator matters our full attention.
>
>> To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call
>> from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a
>> reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help
>> the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I
>> was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations.
>
> What I wish everyone involved would strive to remember is that
> personnel conflicts are inherently difficult and draining, that
> mistakes are often made and responses often poorly calibrated, and
> that there are real people receiving these emails who may experience
> intense emotions as they read them.
>
> PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well.
>
> Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access
> within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he
> should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay.
Ted is doing what he can, and it's only been a few days. We are all
volunteers and do not always have the freedom to drop what we are
doing to give Incubator matters our full attention.
> To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call
> from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a
> reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help
> the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I
> was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations.
What I wish everyone involved would strive to remember is that
personnel conflicts are inherently difficult and draining, that
mistakes are often made and responses often poorly calibrated, and
that there are real people receiving these emails who may experience
intense emotions as they read them.
PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well.
Marvin Humphrey
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access
> within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he
> should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay.
Ted is doing what he can, and it's only been a few days. We are all
volunteers and do not always have the freedom to drop what we are
doing to give Incubator matters our full attention.
> To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call
> from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a
> reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help
> the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I
> was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations.
What I wish everyone involved would strive to remember is that
personnel conflicts are inherently difficult and draining, that
mistakes are often made and responses often poorly calibrated, and
that there are real people receiving these emails who may experience
intense emotions as they read them.
PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On Saturday, September 5, 2015, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert
> this melt-down. There is clearly quite a lot of back-channel happening that
> is not visible to the Apache mailing lists and I (and apparently Bertrand)
> have been unable to get our sub requests moderated through in time.
To be quite blunt, you have a strange way of getting involved, why totally
ignore the recommendations from the mentors and the development team and
instead try to piece together everything yourself. Did you talk with Dave ?
The reaaignations was sent from each person to private@, the notice is
simple to normal apache conclusion of the resigning, so please do not
accuse the development team of not following rules. It is not illegal for
people to talk together, decisions must be on the ML, and they are.
without telling what happened on private@ i.a.o, I feel you should have
acted when the mentors asked for help, instead of suggesting to reboot the
mentors.
As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access
within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he
should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay.
>
> It may be that working with Apache processes is not what the majority of
> the project wanted as part of their project. Apache is definitely not for
> everybody.
This is wrong thinking, I have not heard one of the developers being
unwilling to follow apache rules quite the opposite, please read the ML and
you will see how often e.g. Peter have stated that.
To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call
from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a
reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help
the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I
was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations.
Corinthia had a healthy development community, and IPMC decided to ignore
that and support what was seen as a strange interpretor of the apache
rules. Dave told that it would happen and so did I, so you cannot be
surprised.
>
> I am very sorry to see this happen in this fashion, however. Splits can
> happen amicably and do not require high drama. I will continue to try to
> piece together what the best course of action is over the next few days
> (holiday be damned) and hope that I can get the help of others as well.
> I had very high hopes for this project in apache, both because I believe
in the project and in Apache, but I am not alone in saying, the attitude of
the IPMC is disapointing.
It is fine that you and bertrand goes in to help, but it would have been
great if you had supported the mentors and believed what we as mentors told
IPMC.
Sorry for a strong mail, but seeing a Podling go down the drain for
something that should be logical caused me to respond like this.
Rgds
jan i.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:42 AM, jan i <jani@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache
> > Corinthia.
> >
> > I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in
> > apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably
> prevented
> > the meltdown.
> >
> > The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home.
> >
> > rgds
> > jan i.
> >
>
--
Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On Saturday, September 5, 2015, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert
> this melt-down. There is clearly quite a lot of back-channel happening that
> is not visible to the Apache mailing lists and I (and apparently Bertrand)
> have been unable to get our sub requests moderated through in time.
To be quite blunt, you have a strange way of getting involved, why totally
ignore the recommendations from the mentors and the development team and
instead try to piece together everything yourself. Did you talk with Dave ?
The reaaignations was sent from each person to private@, the notice is
simple to normal apache conclusion of the resigning, so please do not
accuse the development team of not following rules. It is not illegal for
people to talk together, decisions must be on the ML, and they are.
without telling what happened on private@ i.a.o, I feel you should have
acted when the mentors asked for help, instead of suggesting to reboot the
mentors.
As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access
within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he
should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay.
>
> It may be that working with Apache processes is not what the majority of
> the project wanted as part of their project. Apache is definitely not for
> everybody.
This is wrong thinking, I have not heard one of the developers being
unwilling to follow apache rules quite the opposite, please read the ML and
you will see how often e.g. Peter have stated that.
To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call
from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a
reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help
the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I
was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations.
Corinthia had a healthy development community, and IPMC decided to ignore
that and support what was seen as a strange interpretor of the apache
rules. Dave told that it would happen and so did I, so you cannot be
surprised.
>
> I am very sorry to see this happen in this fashion, however. Splits can
> happen amicably and do not require high drama. I will continue to try to
> piece together what the best course of action is over the next few days
> (holiday be damned) and hope that I can get the help of others as well.
> I had very high hopes for this project in apache, both because I believe
in the project and in Apache, but I am not alone in saying, the attitude of
the IPMC is disapointing.
It is fine that you and bertrand goes in to help, but it would have been
great if you had supported the mentors and believed what we as mentors told
IPMC.
Sorry for a strong mail, but seeing a Podling go down the drain for
something that should be logical caused me to respond like this.
Rgds
jan i.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:42 AM, jan i <jani@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache
> > Corinthia.
> >
> > I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in
> > apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably
> prevented
> > the meltdown.
> >
> > The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home.
> >
> > rgds
> > jan i.
> >
>
--
Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert
> this melt-down....
FWIW, I won't be able to do much email in the next few days, I'll try
to catchup with this once I'm more active again.
-Bertrand
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert
this melt-down. There is clearly quite a lot of back-channel happening that
is not visible to the Apache mailing lists and I (and apparently Bertrand)
have been unable to get our sub requests moderated through in time.
It may be that working with Apache processes is not what the majority of
the project wanted as part of their project. Apache is definitely not for
everybody.
I am very sorry to see this happen in this fashion, however. Splits can
happen amicably and do not require high drama. I will continue to try to
piece together what the best course of action is over the next few days
(holiday be damned) and hope that I can get the help of others as well.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:42 AM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache
> Corinthia.
>
> I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in
> apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably prevented
> the meltdown.
>
> The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home.
>
> rgds
> jan i.
>
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc,
jani, louis, pmkelly
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert
this melt-down. There is clearly quite a lot of back-channel happening that
is not visible to the Apache mailing lists and I (and apparently Bertrand)
have been unable to get our sub requests moderated through in time.
It may be that working with Apache processes is not what the majority of
the project wanted as part of their project. Apache is definitely not for
everybody.
I am very sorry to see this happen in this fashion, however. Splits can
happen amicably and do not require high drama. I will continue to try to
piece together what the best course of action is over the next few days
(holiday be damned) and hope that I can get the help of others as well.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:42 AM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache
> Corinthia.
>
> I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in
> apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably prevented
> the meltdown.
>
> The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home.
>
> rgds
> jan i.
>