You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> on 2015/01/20 15:28:27 UTC
Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
committers still involved).
However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
"watching" the project).
In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
(I know, I know...).
(I mentioned gitlab.com )
The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
exist.
In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
simply close.
.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
See http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
for the whole threads :)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
No earlier project has gone through this route
(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
Incubator PMC in this case.
Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
>> There are several ASF projects in the
>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to those
>> projects if you have concerns.
>
> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
>
> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
> to Commons.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Sergio Fernández <se...@salzburgresearch.at>.
On 20/01/15 15:28, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
> with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
> a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
It did happened before:
http://markmail.org/search/?q=list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.general+vote+graduate+subproject+commons
--
Sergio Fernández
Senior Researcher
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at
http://www.salzburgresearch.at
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Sergio Fernández <se...@salzburgresearch.at>.
On 20/01/15 16:08, Rob Vesse wrote:
> On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at
> all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
> stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
> ASF?
Well, this question eventually came across because a collision with
another project proposed to Apache Commons Sandbox, issue extensively
discuss at GitHub:
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues/43
and it's what created all these discussion.
In case we propose Commons RDF for incubation, the background will be
properly discussed in the proposal.
--
Sergio Fernández
Senior Researcher
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at
http://www.salzburgresearch.at
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
I hear what Stian is saying about the noise in Commons. If the team feel its not going to work for them then the incubator might be the right route.
IMHO there is no reason why you couldn't be sponsored by the commons PMC.
You would still need the IPMC to clear releases but that means three IPMC +1 votes. I'm not sure when this became a requirement for an IPMC vote. It used to be that the IPMC was notified. I always ensured that the mentors all voted first (incidentally this is a good check point to see if mentors are still active).
ASIDE: I strongly recommend a return to the original notification of a VOTE in progress. This is another example of unnecessary centralization of process in the IPMC. Control should be with the podlings and its mentors, oversight should be with the PMC. If anyone wants to respond to this make it a new thread please. Let's not distract from this conversation.
I see no reason why your project can't come here, and can graduate to commons if that is what is desired. Ensure you have enough mentors (must be IPMC members, which means ASF members although I can think of a few people on RDF projects I would be happy to vote onto the IPMC if necessary) to get 3 +1 release votes and ensure they are strong enough to tell the IPMC to get out of the way (when appropriate).
Ross
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Rob Vesse<ma...@dotnetrdf.org>
Sent: 1/20/2015 7:10 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Stian
If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or
containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self
contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator
need be involved at all?
Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP
Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)?
Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing
community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking
point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd
likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such
time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be
offered PMC membership
On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at
all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
ASF?
Rob
On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
>(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
>temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
>Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
>caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
>
>
>We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
>interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
>quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
>common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
>then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
>committers still involved).
>
>
>However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
>other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
>community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
>currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
>"watching" the project).
>
>In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
>(I know, I know...).
>
>(I mentioned gitlab.com )
>
>
>The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
>with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
>a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
>
>
>So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
>Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
>
>In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
>rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
>exist.
>
>In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
>dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
>
>Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
>Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
>committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
>simply close.
>
>.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
>those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
>should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
>
>
>See
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917
>RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>for the whole threads :)
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
>To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
>
>
>Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
>Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
>"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
>
>No earlier project has gone through this route
>(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
>deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
>Incubator PMC in this case.
>
>Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
>releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
>and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
>
>As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
>being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
>
>
>
>On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
>>> There are several ASF projects in the
>>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to
>>>those
>>> projects if you have concerns.
>>
>> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
>>
>> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
>> to Commons.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>--
>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>--
>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal was voted -1 in
> the incubator because it had many Apache folks already and didn't need
> to learn anything. Yet the project didn't move into Apache - perhaps
> because it didn't have any pressure or framework to go through the
> Incubator process?
BeanShell got stuck because nobody had enough time and energy to invest
on it after questions had been asked. A new "release" of BeanShell (for
a generic use of the term, not an Apache Release) was uploaded in the
tarball repository of OpenOffice dependencies and that's it. The reason
is simply that people involved preferred to spend their time and energy
in other ways.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org>.
Agreed
The point that I was trying to make is that if those involved already
understand the Apache Way going through Incubation for the sake of it
seems a pointless exercise especially when the legal/IP aspects of things
can be handled in other fashions. If you are in a position to simply
contribute the code directly to the TLP you expect it to live under and
the TLP in question is receptive to that then it is a viable option to
consider.
I'm not saying that Incubation shouldn't happen but that you should
consider if it actually brings the project in question any tangible
benefits.
There seems to be an assumption that coming through the Incubator is the
how you would grow the community but that activity is perfectly capable of
happening in the context of a TLP. One of the key activities of the PMC
should be to continually try and bring in new members of the community
over time so that the project they are charged with managing does not
stagnate.
It's worth remembering that the Incubator itself does not provide much in
the way of help in terms of growing communities since that is something
that really only the incubating projects themselves can do.
Rob
On 20/01/2015 16:04, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>Just because a lot of Apache committers are involved and could put
>things right into another project (or even propose a new TLP directly)
>doesn't mean it happens.
>
>https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal was voted -1 in
>the incubator because it had many Apache folks already and didn't need
>to learn anything. Yet the project didn't move into Apache - perhaps
>because it didn't have any pressure or framework to go through the
>Incubator process?
>
>(It now lives semi-dormantly as an Apache Extras thing at
>https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/beanshell/ - I joined
>recently and it is slowly awakening :) )
>
>
>I think the incubator should be open also for a group of experienced
>Apache folks - although their needs would be different, e.g. more of a
>focus on the project goals and growing their community, and not so
>much worry about IP issues, licenses and build/release procedures.
>
>
>On 20 January 2015 at 15:08, Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org> wrote:
>> Stian
>>
>> If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or
>> containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small
>>self
>> contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator
>> need be involved at all?
>>
>> Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP
>> Clearance procedure
>>(http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)?
>>
>>
>> Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing
>> community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking
>> point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd
>> likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such
>> time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be
>> offered PMC membership
>>
>> On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF
>>at
>> all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
>> stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
>> ASF?
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
>>>(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
>>>temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
>>>Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
>>>caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
>>>
>>>
>>>We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
>>>interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
>>>quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
>>>common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
>>>then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
>>>committers still involved).
>>>
>>>
>>>However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
>>>other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
>>>community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
>>>currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
>>>"watching" the project).
>>>
>>>In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
>>>(I know, I know...).
>>>
>>>(I mentioned gitlab.com )
>>>
>>>
>>>The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
>>>with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
>>>a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
>>>
>>>
>>>So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
>>>Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
>>>
>>>In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
>>>rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
>>>exist.
>>>
>>>In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
>>>dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
>>>
>>>Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
>>>Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
>>>committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
>>>simply close.
>>>
>>>.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
>>>those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
>>>should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
>>>
>>>
>>>See
>>>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB9
>>>17
>>>RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>for the whole threads :)
>>>
>>>
>>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>>>Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
>>>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
>>>To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
>>>Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
>>>"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
>>>
>>>No earlier project has gone through this route
>>>(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
>>>deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
>>>Incubator PMC in this case.
>>>
>>>Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
>>>releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
>>>and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
>>>
>>>As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
>>>being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
>>>>> There are several ASF projects in the
>>>>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to
>>>>>those
>>>>> projects if you have concerns.
>>>>
>>>> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
>>>>
>>>> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
>>>> to Commons.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>>>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>>
>>>--
>>>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>>>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>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
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
Just because a lot of Apache committers are involved and could put
things right into another project (or even propose a new TLP directly)
doesn't mean it happens.
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal was voted -1 in
the incubator because it had many Apache folks already and didn't need
to learn anything. Yet the project didn't move into Apache - perhaps
because it didn't have any pressure or framework to go through the
Incubator process?
(It now lives semi-dormantly as an Apache Extras thing at
https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/beanshell/ - I joined
recently and it is slowly awakening :) )
I think the incubator should be open also for a group of experienced
Apache folks - although their needs would be different, e.g. more of a
focus on the project goals and growing their community, and not so
much worry about IP issues, licenses and build/release procedures.
On 20 January 2015 at 15:08, Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org> wrote:
> Stian
>
> If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or
> containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self
> contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator
> need be involved at all?
>
> Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP
> Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)?
>
>
> Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing
> community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking
> point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd
> likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such
> time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be
> offered PMC membership
>
> On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at
> all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
> stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
> ASF?
>
> Rob
>
> On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
>>(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
>>temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
>>Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
>>caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
>>
>>
>>We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
>>interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
>>quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
>>common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
>>then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
>>committers still involved).
>>
>>
>>However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
>>other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
>>community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
>>currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
>>"watching" the project).
>>
>>In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
>>(I know, I know...).
>>
>>(I mentioned gitlab.com )
>>
>>
>>The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
>>with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
>>a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
>>
>>
>>So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
>>Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
>>
>>In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
>>rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
>>exist.
>>
>>In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
>>dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
>>
>>Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
>>Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
>>committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
>>simply close.
>>
>>.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
>>those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
>>should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
>>
>>
>>See
>>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917
>>RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>>for the whole threads :)
>>
>>
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>>Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
>>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
>>To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
>>
>>
>>Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
>>Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
>>"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
>>
>>No earlier project has gone through this route
>>(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
>>deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
>>Incubator PMC in this case.
>>
>>Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
>>releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
>>and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
>>
>>As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
>>being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
>>
>>
>>
>>On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
>>>> There are several ASF projects in the
>>>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to
>>>>those
>>>> projects if you have concerns.
>>>
>>> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
>>>
>>> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
>>> to Commons.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>--
>>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
>>--
>>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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
>
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
It's not for the IPMC to decide commons policy. If they feel another mailing list is not appropriate that is their call.
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Niclas Hedhman<ma...@hedhman.org>
Sent: 1/20/2015 8:07 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
I agree that incoming codebase can go through the IP Clearance, and if the
committers are already Commons folks (predominantly), and the only actual
issue is the number of mails on the dev@, then I think that separate
mailing list is fine, perhaps with the exception of not having a name
related to the RDF component, perhaps design-in-progress@ or other
indicator that a particular activity is happening there.
Niclas
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org> wrote:
> Stian
>
> If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or
> containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self
> contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator
> need be involved at all?
>
> Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP
> Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)?
>
>
> Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing
> community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking
> point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd
> likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such
> time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be
> offered PMC membership
>
> On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at
> all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
> stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
> ASF?
>
> Rob
>
> On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
> >(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
> >temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
> >Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
> >caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
> >
> >
> >We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
> >interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
> >quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
> >common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
> >then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
> >committers still involved).
> >
> >
> >However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
> >other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
> >community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
> >currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
> >"watching" the project).
> >
> >In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
> >(I know, I know...).
> >
> >(I mentioned gitlab.com )
> >
> >
> >The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
> >with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
> >a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
> >
> >
> >So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
> >Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
> >
> >In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
> >rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
> >exist.
> >
> >In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
> >dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
> >
> >Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
> >Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
> >committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
> >simply close.
> >
> >.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
> >those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
> >should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
> >
> >
> >See
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917
> >RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >for the whole threads :)
> >
> >
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> >Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
> >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
> >To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
> >
> >
> >Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
> >Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
> >"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
> >
> >No earlier project has gone through this route
> >(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
> >deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
> >Incubator PMC in this case.
> >
> >Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
> >releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
> >and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
> >
> >As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
> >being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
> >
> >
> >
> >On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
> >>> There are several ASF projects in the
> >>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to
> >>>those
> >>> projects if you have concerns.
> >>
> >> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
> >>
> >> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
> >> to Commons.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >--
> >Stian Soiland-Reyes
> >Apache Taverna (incubating)
> >http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
> >
> >--
> >Stian Soiland-Reyes
> >Apache Taverna (incubating)
> >http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >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
>
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
I agree that incoming codebase can go through the IP Clearance, and if the
committers are already Commons folks (predominantly), and the only actual
issue is the number of mails on the dev@, then I think that separate
mailing list is fine, perhaps with the exception of not having a name
related to the RDF component, perhaps design-in-progress@ or other
indicator that a particular activity is happening there.
Niclas
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org> wrote:
> Stian
>
> If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or
> containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self
> contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator
> need be involved at all?
>
> Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP
> Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)?
>
>
> Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing
> community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking
> point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd
> likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such
> time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be
> offered PMC membership
>
> On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at
> all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
> stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
> ASF?
>
> Rob
>
> On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
> >(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
> >temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
> >Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
> >caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
> >
> >
> >We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
> >interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
> >quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
> >common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
> >then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
> >committers still involved).
> >
> >
> >However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
> >other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
> >community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
> >currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
> >"watching" the project).
> >
> >In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
> >(I know, I know...).
> >
> >(I mentioned gitlab.com )
> >
> >
> >The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
> >with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
> >a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
> >
> >
> >So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
> >Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
> >
> >In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
> >rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
> >exist.
> >
> >In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
> >dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
> >
> >Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
> >Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
> >committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
> >simply close.
> >
> >.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
> >those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
> >should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
> >
> >
> >See
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917
> >RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >for the whole threads :)
> >
> >
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> >Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
> >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
> >To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
> >
> >
> >Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
> >Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
> >"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
> >
> >No earlier project has gone through this route
> >(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
> >deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
> >Incubator PMC in this case.
> >
> >Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
> >releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
> >and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
> >
> >As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
> >being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
> >
> >
> >
> >On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
> >>> There are several ASF projects in the
> >>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to
> >>>those
> >>> projects if you have concerns.
> >>
> >> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
> >>
> >> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
> >> to Commons.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >--
> >Stian Soiland-Reyes
> >Apache Taverna (incubating)
> >http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
> >
> >--
> >Stian Soiland-Reyes
> >Apache Taverna (incubating)
> >http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >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
>
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Incubating with Apache Commons as champion?
Posted by Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org>.
Stian
If a community made predominantly of existing Apache committers (or
containing a strong core of) already exists and this would be a small self
contained module as part of Apache Commons then why does the Incubator
need be involved at all?
Why can this not just be submitted directly to Apache Commons via the IP
Clearance procedure (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html)?
Commons already allows any ASF committer to commit so the existing
community can continue working on the code just fine. The only sticking
point would be once Commons-RDF wants to release in which case you'd
likely need to canvas the larger commons community for votes until such
time as the Commons-RDF committers have earned sufficient merit to be
offered PMC membership
On the other hand does Commons-RDF necessarily need to come to the ASF at
all? If it is a small self-contained interface module that will remain
stable what does it gain (other than brand association) by coming to the
ASF?
Rob
On 20/01/2015 14:28, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>The discussion on dev@commons about coming-to-Apache Commons-RDF
>(https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/) seems to be rejecting a
>temporary mailing list like rdf@commons as it is seen t be splitting
>Apache Commons as a project - the ideal committer on Apache Commons is
>caring about all its components (avoiding the Jakarta pitfalls).
>
>
>We had not considered becoming a TLP as once the API (mainly a set of
>interfaces) is settled, by then it will probably be pretty much a
>quiet project except the odd maintenance patch - and also by being a
>common component of several RDF projects within Apache, its best home
>then would be under Commons (presumably with most of the original
>committers still involved).
>
>
>However the large traffic of dev@commons (~400/month) about all the
>other components can be a problem for trying to engage the non-Apache
>community around commons-rdf while we flesh out the API. (This has
>currently been done solely through Github issues, pull requests, and
>"watching" the project).
>
>In a way we are limited by the technology of the Apache mailing lists.
>(I know, I know...).
>
>(I mentioned gitlab.com )
>
>
>The suggestion is that Commons-RDF could be a incubator project, but
>with a projected path to become part of the Apache Commons instead of
>a TLP. (I believe this path has not happened before)
>
>
>So this would be using the old structure of having a champion of
>Apache Commons - could this be a workable incubator project?
>
>In a way it would be incubating just the code until API maturity
>rather than the community or "Apache Way" as both of those already
>exist.
>
>In such an (old skool) setup, would it be the Commons PMC /
>dev@commons who would vote over the incubating releases?
>
>Once "graduating" it would just become a component under Apache
>Commons and the community would just be dev@commons where the
>committers would already be members - the dev@rdf.incubator list would
>simply close.
>
>.. and where would mentors come from? Would existing committers from
>those other Apache projects (Jena, Marmotta, Clerezza) be enough - or
>should it be someone from IMPC or from dev@commons?
>
>
>See
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAB917
>RLJE%2BgFEpw%3Dyp-c-HpXEnvL12JZLLpc4wphGyjGH_6%3D9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>for the whole threads :)
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>Date: 20 January 2015 at 14:06
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][RDF] Separate mailing list for Commons RDF
>To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
>
>
>Agree that maybe the the Incubator with a projected path to the
>Commons could be a workable middle ground while Commons-RDF is still
>"incubating" code-wise (but not community or Apache Way-wise).
>
>No earlier project has gone through this route
>(https://incubator.apache.org/projects/ ) - this would reuse the
>deprecated "Champion" project to be Apache Commons instead of
>Incubator PMC in this case.
>
>Such a proposal has some good features - I presume commons-rdf
>releases would still be voted over (and thus involve) the Commons PMC
>and dev@commons (as they would after "graduating").
>
>As an API, then Commons-RDF should not be considered stable while
>being in 0.x.x-incubating anyway.
>
>
>
>On 20 January 2015 at 13:58, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
>>> There are several ASF projects in the
>>> RDF space. They have been through the incubator. Please do talk to
>>>those
>>> projects if you have concerns.
>>
>> I am sorry - but how are those projects relevant in this case?
>>
>> And what's so bad about the incubator? You could (maybe) later on come
>> to Commons.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>--
>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>--
>Stian Soiland-Reyes
>Apache Taverna (incubating)
>http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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