podlings and github

[Joe Schaefer <jo...@gmail.com>]

One of the concerns members are talking about with podlings on github
concerns their overall presence there.  To be brief, we need to take a
closer look at any podlings that are using their own project on github
versus using their clone on the apache github project.

So that opens the question I now put to the mentors: do we have any
podlings that are hosting on github using anything other than their
github.com/apache presence?

Re: podlings and github

[Joe Schaefer <jo...@gmail.com>]

As Ted points out, so long as the prior github presence is effectively
mothballed I don't see any problem with leaving it up for the foreseeable
future.

The main concern of mine and the membership involves podlings making
active use of a github repo not under Apache's direct control.  This doesn't
necessarily mean there's a problem, it just means we should have a look
to see if everything is happening according to policy.



On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Peter Ansell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Does Apache use GitHub's "move" repository functionality that adds a
> > redirect if the name changes once? If not, is it viable for the
> > Commons RDF group to keep their original project (which contains
> > directions on how to get to the current repository) until they
> > graduate get a permanent location in the /apache/ namespace to
> > minimise the number of broken links around the internet to this
> > project?
> >
>
> As long as the old project is frozen and has a bold warning that it
> represents the past, I doubt that it is a problem that it exists at
> graduation.
>
>
> > This project, and others, may be concerned about both their likelihood
> > of graduating from the incubator (requiring them to go back to their
> > previous Github organisation), and the Apache policy on having two
> > renames for their project, which damages their brand if people find
> > broken links on the internet.
> >
>
> Whether or not they graduate is largely up to them.  Recent non-graduations
> have fallen into two categories:
>
> a) projects which just didn't continue
>
> b) projects which insisted on things like GPL mandatory dependencies
>
> Basically, neither kind of project *wanted* to be Apache projects. The
> first kind didn't want anything enough to continue (I simplify, of course)
> and the second kind didn't want to follow through on the Apache IP
> requirements.
>
> Pretty much any project that continues to be vital, produces clean Apache
> style releases, is willing to be careful about where their code comes from
> and be open, friendly and inclusive can become an Apache project.
>
> Maybe this project needs a long talk with somebody who has been around the
> circuit a few times.  On the other hand, any project that has the mentors
> that Commons RDF has should have ready access to Apache expertise.
>
> Looking at the email archives just now, it looks to me like commons RDF is
> finding it difficult to build a community and maintain any serious
> momentum.  Seeing only a few emails or commits for months on end raises red
> flags to me.  A project that peters out at Apache is likely to have petered
> out anyway, however, so I don't see much for the original folks to worry
> about.
>

Re: podlings and github

[Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Peter Ansell <an...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does Apache use GitHub's "move" repository functionality that adds a
> redirect if the name changes once? If not, is it viable for the
> Commons RDF group to keep their original project (which contains
> directions on how to get to the current repository) until they
> graduate get a permanent location in the /apache/ namespace to
> minimise the number of broken links around the internet to this
> project?
>

As long as the old project is frozen and has a bold warning that it
represents the past, I doubt that it is a problem that it exists at
graduation.


> This project, and others, may be concerned about both their likelihood
> of graduating from the incubator (requiring them to go back to their
> previous Github organisation), and the Apache policy on having two
> renames for their project, which damages their brand if people find
> broken links on the internet.
>

Whether or not they graduate is largely up to them.  Recent non-graduations
have fallen into two categories:

a) projects which just didn't continue

b) projects which insisted on things like GPL mandatory dependencies

Basically, neither kind of project *wanted* to be Apache projects. The
first kind didn't want anything enough to continue (I simplify, of course)
and the second kind didn't want to follow through on the Apache IP
requirements.

Pretty much any project that continues to be vital, produces clean Apache
style releases, is willing to be careful about where their code comes from
and be open, friendly and inclusive can become an Apache project.

Maybe this project needs a long talk with somebody who has been around the
circuit a few times.  On the other hand, any project that has the mentors
that Commons RDF has should have ready access to Apache expertise.

Looking at the email archives just now, it looks to me like commons RDF is
finding it difficult to build a community and maintain any serious
momentum.  Seeing only a few emails or commits for months on end raises red
flags to me.  A project that peters out at Apache is likely to have petered
out anyway, however, so I don't see much for the original folks to worry
about.

Re: podlings and github

[Peter Ansell <an...@gmail.com>]

Hi Joe,

The Commons RDF incubator project has not removed their previous
Github presence yet [1], as it gained a following before the move into
the incubator and we didn't want to break those links prematurely
before people recognised the new location. What we did do when
accepted to the incubator was to update the README.md file to include
a notice redirecting users to the Apache Incubator site, but otherwise
it has left the git history before that point intact.

The Apache incubator repository [2] still has significantly less
watchers/stars/forks than the original repo, but the numbers on the
original repo have not changed significantly since moving to the
incubator.

Does Apache use GitHub's "move" repository functionality that adds a
redirect if the name changes once? If not, is it viable for the
Commons RDF group to keep their original project (which contains
directions on how to get to the current repository) until they
graduate get a permanent location in the /apache/ namespace to
minimise the number of broken links around the internet to this
project?

This project, and others, may be concerned about both their likelihood
of graduating from the incubator (requiring them to go back to their
previous Github organisation), and the Apache policy on having two
renames for their project, which damages their brand if people find
broken links on the internet.

Thanks,

Peter

[1] https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf
[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf

On 3 November 2015 at 02:01, Joe Schaefer <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One of the concerns members are talking about with podlings on github
> concerns their overall presence there.  To be brief, we need to take a
> closer look at any podlings that are using their own project on github
> versus using their clone on the apache github project.
>
> So that opens the question I now put to the mentors: do we have any
> podlings that are hosting on github using anything other than their
> github.com/apache presence?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org