jspwiki

[Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>]

So, I voted for the release without making a detailed IP check (just
signatures, buildability, etc) based on the state in the clutch.

We seem to have a problem here. I've pinged two of the mentors here
chosen by people in my gmail 'to' cache; could we get some input?

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

Re: jspwiki

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We seem to have a problem here. I've pinged two of the mentors here
> chosen by people in my gmail 'to' cache; could we get some input?

JSPWiki has been troubled for quite some time. Earlier this year
(prompted by concerns raised by Sam) they discussed leaving the ASF as
one option due to lack of progress [1]. That proposal didn't reach
consensus, so a bit later a premature graduation attempt was made [2].
Meanwhile the project activity has remained pretty low compared to
what it was when the project entered incubation five(!) years ago.

There is still some energy in JSPWiki and I salute the efforts of Juan
Pablo and others who are keeping the project alive, but unfortunately
we aren't providing enough mentoring and other help to push the
community through incubation. Looking at jspwiki-dev@ I see only six
mentor posts since the beginning of this year.

I think JSPWiki still has the makings of a good Apache project, but
they clearly need more help. Any volunteers?

[1] http://markmail.org/message/etgsawr7mtjggppt
[2] http://markmail.org/message/bnkpzwdltlihce3k

BR,

Jukka Zitting

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

Re: jspwiki

[Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> Sent from my tablet
>> On Oct 7, 2012 10:08 PM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> So, I voted for the release without making a detailed IP check (just
>>> signatures, buildability, etc) based on the state in the clutch.
>>
>> That's pretty worrying. A vote for a release is a verification that it is a
>> legally defensible release. No-one should get voting without doing a full
>> review.
>>
>> Ross
>
> +1, particularly podling releases, where we might have not performed
> an IP check before and RMs might not be completely familiar with "The
> Apache Way".

I owe everyone an apology here. I misread the columns on the clutch.
If I had seen that this was the first release ever for this podling, I
would either have looked more closely or I would have declined to vote
at all.


>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.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: jspwiki

[Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> Sent from my tablet
> On Oct 7, 2012 10:08 PM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, I voted for the release without making a detailed IP check (just
>> signatures, buildability, etc) based on the state in the clutch.
>
> That's pretty worrying. A vote for a release is a verification that it is a
> legally defensible release. No-one should get voting without doing a full
> review.
>
> Ross

+1, particularly podling releases, where we might have not performed
an IP check before and RMs might not be completely familiar with "The
Apache Way".

-- 
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

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

Re: jspwiki

[Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>]

>
>> What I want to know about this is whether incubator.apache.org/clutch
>> is lying to me when it claims that this project has released before.
>
> I do see that you indicated elsewhere in this thread that
> you did misinterpret that aspect of the table. Is there
> something that we can do to make it more clear?

I hesitate to blame my confusion on the design of the table. I can
reconstruct how I went astray, but I don't think it's edifying.

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

Re: jspwiki

[David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>]

Benson Margulies wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> > Benson Margulies wrote:
> >>
> >> So, I voted for the release without making a detailed IP check (just
> >> signatures, buildability, etc) based on the state in the clutch.
> >
> > That's pretty worrying. A vote for a release is a verification that it is a
> > legally defensible release. No-one should get voting without doing a full
> > review.
> 
> Ross, please clarify your view. If you think that every voter on every
> release at Apache is checking every single file for a correct header,
> then I think that there's a significant gap between theory and
> practice. If you are focussed in incubator issues, read on.
> 
> In fact, it *is* a legally defensible release, unless the clutch is
> lying about IP clearance. Some missing or malformed headers do not
> make it legally defective, just not up to our usual standards. I did
> check the critical characteristics that make up a legally defensible
> release.

Clutch deliberately does not mention anything about "IP clearance".
People need to look for that detail elsewhere.

Also it deliberately does not have a column for whether their
RAT report has issues. Those reports need to be reviewed in detail.

> What I want to know about this is whether incubator.apache.org/clutch
> is lying to me when it claims that this project has released before.

I do see that you indicated elsewhere in this thread that
you did misinterpret that aspect of the table. Is there
something that we can do to make it more clear?

> I also think that we might have an incubator-specific issue here. When
> I participate in the PMC of running project, I depend on the PMC to
> verify headers and such either (a) at checkin, or (b) with rat. I do
> not think it's a great idea to leave that for release voting. However,
> I shouldn't be depending on podling members to know enough to do this,
> and apparently I can't depend on mentors. So perhaps the IPMC needs to
> take a more mandatory view of RAT.

> >> We seem to have a problem here. I've pinged two of the mentors here
> >> chosen by people in my gmail 'to' cache; could we get some input?

Henning did say here ages ago that he had stopped
being a Mentor, but people from the relevant podlings
still need to modify their lists of mentors.

-David

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

Re: jspwiki

[Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> Sent from my tablet
> On Oct 7, 2012 10:08 PM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, I voted for the release without making a detailed IP check (just
>> signatures, buildability, etc) based on the state in the clutch.
>
> That's pretty worrying. A vote for a release is a verification that it is a
> legally defensible release. No-one should get voting without doing a full
> review.

Ross, please clarify your view. If you think that every voter on every
release at Apache is checking every single file for a correct header,
then I think that there's a significant gap between theory and
practice. If you are focussed in incubator issues, read on.

In fact, it *is* a legally defensible release, unless the clutch is
lying about IP clearance. Some missing or malformed headers do not
make it legally defective, just not up to our usual standards. I did
check the critical characteristics that make up a legally defensible
release.

What I want to know about this is whether incubator.apache.org/clutch
is lying to me when it claims that this project has released before.

I also think that we might have an incubator-specific issue here. When
I participate in the PMC of running project, I depend on the PMC to
verify headers and such either (a) at checkin, or (b) with rat. I do
not think it's a great idea to leave that for release voting. However,
I shouldn't be depending on podling members to know enough to do this,
and apparently I can't depend on mentors. So perhaps the IPMC needs to
take a more mandatory view of RAT.



>
> Ross
>
>>
>> We seem to have a problem here. I've pinged two of the mentors here
>> chosen by people in my gmail 'to' cache; could we get some input?
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: jspwiki

[Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>]

Sent from my tablet
On Oct 7, 2012 10:08 PM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So, I voted for the release without making a detailed IP check (just
> signatures, buildability, etc) based on the state in the clutch.

That's pretty worrying. A vote for a release is a verification that it is a
legally defensible release. No-one should get voting without doing a full
review.

Ross

>
> We seem to have a problem here. I've pinged two of the mentors here
> chosen by people in my gmail 'to' cache; could we get some input?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>