You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> on 2007/01/29 19:49:38 UTC
RE: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
The ASF Board, by Cliff Schmidt, wrote:
> The report on Heraldry mentions a "single large block checkin"
Two large block check-ins in January. One for python, one for ruby. It
seems as if most of the development is happening off-line and being
committed by proxy. Paul Querna posted one message raising those concerns.
There were no replies, and he didn't follow up.
> "almost no activity" on the dev list
Almost none is a tad of a stretch, but certainly nothing like the level of
developer discussion that one would want to see. And that compounds when
considered in light of the proxy commits.
> and license problems not being responded to "despite requests from the
mentors".
That happened back in October. The last message I see on the subject was
from Ted in November, saying: "I sent a note about that to heraldry-dev and
heard crickets in response." On the other hand, the Mentors are posting
little more than a message a month, each, so there isn't much hands-on
guidance.
Clearly there needs to be some corrective action, and more guidance on how
an ASF project is supposed to conduct itself.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Alex Karasulu <ao...@bellsouth.net>.
Ted Leung wrote:
>
> On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
>> The ASF Board, by Cliff Schmidt, wrote:
>>
>>> The report on Heraldry mentions a "single large block checkin"
>>
>> Two large block check-ins in January. One for python, one for ruby. It
>> seems as if most of the development is happening off-line and being
>> committed by proxy. Paul Querna posted one message raising those
>> concerns.
>> There were no replies, and he didn't follow up.
>>
>>> "almost no activity" on the dev list
>>
>> Almost none is a tad of a stretch, but certainly nothing like the
>> level of
>> developer discussion that one would want to see. And that compounds when
>> considered in light of the proxy commits.
>
> I don't think that e-mails copied to another mailing list count as
> activity. By that measure spam would also count. Until last week,
> there had not been a single message dealing with code that was checked
> in either prior to or after the checkin.
>
>>
>>> and license problems not being responded to "despite requests from the
>> mentors".
>>
>> That happened back in October. The last message I see on the subject was
>> from Ted in November, saying: "I sent a note about that to
>> heraldry-dev and
>> heard crickets in response." On the other hand, the Mentors are posting
>> little more than a message a month, each, so there isn't much hands-on
>> guidance.
>
> We've also been attempting to get some parties/corporations to respond
> via off-list e-mails, which as you can see, have not been particularly
> successful either.
>
>>
>> Clearly there needs to be some corrective action, and more guidance on
>> how
>> an ASF project is supposed to conduct itself.
>
> That's not much of a plan, which is what the board is asking for.
> Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here, besides upping
> the number of messages that say "please talk to us on the list". But
> given that development is happening somewhere else, I am doubtful as to
> whether that would make any difference. Late today a thread started up
> which clearly shows that some amount of development is happening
> elsewhere:
> <http://mail-archive.com/heraldry-dev%40incubator.apache.org/msg00147.html>.
> I would definitely appreciate concrete suggestions of things to do.
I'd veto any alien code that is being developed outside the community.
If it happens frequently then kick off a vote and see if the PPMC is
ready to revoke commit rights temporarily. If not that's a pretty
serious problem.
IMO this is something that threaten Heraldry's chances to form an
acceptable community and that would be a shame. The project has so much
promise. I do hope this issues get sorted out.
Regards,
Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 02:25, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Reset to a monthly reporting requirement. Set the bar
> at three months from now to bring development to the list. If that does
> not happen, flush it.
After reading the refered mail archive, I agree with the above.
IMO, give the slack of the final block commit (to get on with it) and demand
1. development discussions
2. frequent commits in association
3. resolve the licensing issues
If that doesn't surface, I am in favour of *strongly suggesting* the
participants to establish the open development practices elsewhere, and come
back when they feel ready.
Cheers
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>.
+1 to giving them a second chance.
Sanjiva.
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 12:25 -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > Sorry to be blunt. "Can it!" - That's what we did with TSIK. There's
> > no point continuing incubation. We are not here to serve the interests
> > of parties/corporations.
>
> Dims - I agree with you, with fair warning. It's clear that the committers
> and actual authors are still entirely in HERE and THERE, US and THEM mode.
> And I simply ask if the mentors have effectively communicated this sufficiently?
>
> Learning to be part of the ASF partly involves teaching. The rest involves
> giving up the privacy shields.
>
> Some efforts, such as Lokahi, are the efforts of individuals combined into
> a great whole. Steve often contributes a big chunk of functionality. But
> I know him well enough to know he's the one who was hacking at that block
> himself for a solid week or two. If it were the product of collaboration of
> a dev team at his company, there would be pushback.
>
> It's not acceptable. Reset to a monthly reporting requirement. Set the bar
> at three months from now to bring development to the list. If that does
> not happen, flush it.
>
> Bill
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Director; Open Source Initiative; http://www.opensource.org/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Sorry to be blunt. "Can it!" - That's what we did with TSIK. There's
> no point continuing incubation. We are not here to serve the interests
> of parties/corporations.
Dims - I agree with you, with fair warning. It's clear that the committers
and actual authors are still entirely in HERE and THERE, US and THEM mode.
And I simply ask if the mentors have effectively communicated this sufficiently?
Learning to be part of the ASF partly involves teaching. The rest involves
giving up the privacy shields.
Some efforts, such as Lokahi, are the efforts of individuals combined into
a great whole. Steve often contributes a big chunk of functionality. But
I know him well enough to know he's the one who was hacking at that block
himself for a solid week or two. If it were the product of collaboration of
a dev team at his company, there would be pushback.
It's not acceptable. Reset to a monthly reporting requirement. Set the bar
at three months from now to bring development to the list. If that does
not happen, flush it.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Sorry to be blunt. "Can it!" - That's what we did with TSIK. There's
no point continuing incubation. We are not here to serve the interests
of parties/corporations.
thanks,
dims
On 1/30/07, Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> > The ASF Board, by Cliff Schmidt, wrote:
> >
> >> The report on Heraldry mentions a "single large block checkin"
> >
> > Two large block check-ins in January. One for python, one for
> > ruby. It
> > seems as if most of the development is happening off-line and being
> > committed by proxy. Paul Querna posted one message raising those
> > concerns.
> > There were no replies, and he didn't follow up.
> >
> >> "almost no activity" on the dev list
> >
> > Almost none is a tad of a stretch, but certainly nothing like the
> > level of
> > developer discussion that one would want to see. And that
> > compounds when
> > considered in light of the proxy commits.
>
> I don't think that e-mails copied to another mailing list count as
> activity. By that measure spam would also count. Until last week,
> there had not been a single message dealing with code that was
> checked in either prior to or after the checkin.
>
> >
> >> and license problems not being responded to "despite requests from
> >> the
> > mentors".
> >
> > That happened back in October. The last message I see on the
> > subject was
> > from Ted in November, saying: "I sent a note about that to heraldry-
> > dev and
> > heard crickets in response." On the other hand, the Mentors are
> > posting
> > little more than a message a month, each, so there isn't much hands-on
> > guidance.
>
> We've also been attempting to get some parties/corporations to
> respond via off-list e-mails, which as you can see, have not been
> particularly successful either.
>
> >
> > Clearly there needs to be some corrective action, and more guidance
> > on how
> > an ASF project is supposed to conduct itself.
>
> That's not much of a plan, which is what the board is asking for.
> Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here, besides
> upping the number of messages that say "please talk to us on the
> list". But given that development is happening somewhere else, I
> am doubtful as to whether that would make any difference. Late
> today a thread started up which clearly shows that some amount of
> development is happening elsewhere: <http://mail-archive.com/heraldry-
> dev%40incubator.apache.org/msg00147.html>. I would definitely
> appreciate concrete suggestions of things to do.
>
> Ted
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://wso2.org/ :: Oxygen for Web Services Developers
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by "Recordon, David" <dr...@verisign.com>.
Hey Bill,
Without speaking for Kevin, I think that is very good feedback. As to
your points with my interpretation.
Kevin is speaking on behalf of JanRain which is the company that has
done the majority of OpenID implementations to-date. What I see him
expressing is their commitment to moving their development to the
Heraldry SVN and integrating into the ASF environment. Part of this
problem is that when JanRain did their initial code donation,
development didn't move at that point. Maybe what makes more sense is
removing the code they contributed a few months ago and starting fresh
with them tar'ing up their repository they want to contribute and have
it voted in on the heraldry-dev list?
Activity level issues aside, we need to figure out how to get this code
in so that we as the Heraldry community can resolve the concerns around
activity and methodology.
--David
-----Original Message-----
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:18 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: heraldry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Recordon, David wrote:
> Hi all,
> As Ted mentioned there was a thread started yesterday by Kevin Turner
> (
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-heraldry-dev/200701
> .m
> box/%3c1170119622.5938.41.camel@localhost%3e) about how JanRain really
> is now committed to moving all of their work into the Heraldry
project.
> As to not reproduce everything he said here, I really would encourage
> everyone to go read that message.
No disrespect, David; that's the message that inspired my reaction. A
couple of small points...
"This time, I think the results were decisive."
1. We - Heraldry Project? Your Company? US vs THEM - bad signal.
(I'm not saying you won't have internal dialogs. Presented this way
continues to highlight the divisions.)
"We are going to abandon darcs and use svn for all Heraldry projects."
2. I was not clear this is ASF svn.
However, there are some patches left in our write queue that we need to
flush.
3. US vs THEM again - and "our" queue. I'm as happy to "flush" any
project
who believes code deserves to be "flushed" at the ASF.
"So later this week you'll see a burst of roughly sixty patches from me
in libraries/python/openid/trunk, and some more from Jonathan in
libraries/php."
4. You present these as decided. Politically correct "I have about NN
patches
to offer back in lib.../trunk and Jonathan has about NN patches to
commit
to libraries/php that are lingering in our vendor branch. They do
..."
"After that, commits should come in at more regular intervals in more
manageable quantities."
5. Presented as decided. You aren't in a position to say that w.r.t.
other
committers. "I'll try to space out my commit activity after that so
it's
easier to follow, and will give my commits an extra couple of weeks
for
comments." Again - it's how you chose to phrase things.
>> There are some other things we'll need to update too -- e.g. our
>> buildbot is currently triggered by the darcs apply hook.
first comment I had no issues with. Your box, your toys, in most
projects either individuals or companies have resources to offer. May I
point you to the CIA notifications that svn is willing to generate?
http://cia.navi.cx/
They are sent automatically by our svn - configured by
infrastructure@a.o for the purpose of providing instant notices on
projects' irc.freenode.net channels, but I'm sure it's trivial for you
to use these messages directly. Ask on i@a.o.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Recordon, David wrote:
> Hi all,
> As Ted mentioned there was a thread started yesterday by Kevin Turner (
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-heraldry-dev/200701.m
> box/%3c1170119622.5938.41.camel@localhost%3e) about how JanRain really
> is now committed to moving all of their work into the Heraldry project.
> As to not reproduce everything he said here, I really would encourage
> everyone to go read that message.
No disrespect, David; that's the message that inspired my reaction. A couple
of small points...
"This time, I think the results were decisive."
1. We - Heraldry Project? Your Company? US vs THEM - bad signal.
(I'm not saying you won't have internal dialogs. Presented this way continues
to highlight the divisions.)
"We are going to abandon darcs and use svn for all Heraldry projects."
2. I was not clear this is ASF svn.
However, there are some patches left in our write queue that we need to
flush.
3. US vs THEM again - and "our" queue. I'm as happy to "flush" any project
who believes code deserves to be "flushed" at the ASF.
"So later this week you'll see a burst of roughly sixty patches from me in
libraries/python/openid/trunk, and some more from Jonathan in libraries/php."
4. You present these as decided. Politically correct "I have about NN patches
to offer back in lib.../trunk and Jonathan has about NN patches to commit
to libraries/php that are lingering in our vendor branch. They do ..."
"After that, commits should come in at more regular intervals in more manageable
quantities."
5. Presented as decided. You aren't in a position to say that w.r.t. other
committers. "I'll try to space out my commit activity after that so it's
easier to follow, and will give my commits an extra couple of weeks for
comments." Again - it's how you chose to phrase things.
>> There are some other things we'll need to update too -- e.g. our buildbot
>> is currently triggered by the darcs apply hook.
first comment I had no issues with. Your box, your toys, in most projects
either individuals or companies have resources to offer. May I point you to
the CIA notifications that svn is willing to generate?
http://cia.navi.cx/
They are sent automatically by our svn - configured by infrastructure@a.o for
the purpose of providing instant notices on projects' irc.freenode.net channels,
but I'm sure it's trivial for you to use these messages directly. Ask on i@a.o.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by "Recordon, David" <dr...@verisign.com>.
Hi all,
As Ted mentioned there was a thread started yesterday by Kevin Turner (
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-heraldry-dev/200701.m
box/%3c1170119622.5938.41.camel@localhost%3e) about how JanRain really
is now committed to moving all of their work into the Heraldry project.
As to not reproduce everything he said here, I really would encourage
everyone to go read that message.
I also sent a note last night
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-heraldry-dev/200701.
mbox/%3c7E7CA24460925C44AEB4F202BA7E45F302C8D5@MOU1WNEXMB14.vcorp.ad.vrs
n.com%3e) which I will quote here:
> I think this developer community both understands and appreciates the
issues that the Heraldry
> project has. To me, I see Kevin's message as a step in the right
direction. It shows commitment
> on behalf of JanRain to change their development practices and move to
become a real part
> of Heraldry. I've also been trying myself to write some code and
engage this list over the
> past week and intend to continue doing so. There are others as well
in the CardSpace community
> who have expressed interest to me in donating code to the project,
though are unready to do
> so right now for one reason or another. Do I feel that anything we've
done thus far is perfect,
> let alone great; no.
>
> With that said, I think this is the drop dead point of either this
project really gets up
> and moves forward or dies by its next board report. I agree block
commits suck and are annoying,
> but if that is what it is going to take so that real-time and active
development can/will
> occur here, then I think the pain it causes one final time is
worthwhile. Quite honestly,
> the OpenID community is moving too fast to spread these commits out
over the next month, let
> alone figure out how to deal with commits that would happen within the
next month. I also
> assume that updating the license from the LGPL to ASFv2 would be part
of this effort, as it
> seems Kevin's message expresses real commitment to making this project
succeed.
>
> IMHO, we need this final chance to show that we can make this happen,
and yes we will stumble
> over The Apache Way from time to time, but at least this one last
block commit will give us
> the chance to deal with the other issues Ted raised. To me, this
means we'll either succeed
> or go down in flames; though not just give up now.
I really think it would be a shame to kill the project today when there
now actually is a light starting to flicker at the end of the tunnel.
--David
-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Leung [mailto:twleung@sauria.com]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 11:25 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> The ASF Board, by Cliff Schmidt, wrote:
>
>> The report on Heraldry mentions a "single large block checkin"
>
> Two large block check-ins in January. One for python, one for ruby.
> It seems as if most of the development is happening off-line and being
> committed by proxy. Paul Querna posted one message raising those
> concerns.
> There were no replies, and he didn't follow up.
>
>> "almost no activity" on the dev list
>
> Almost none is a tad of a stretch, but certainly nothing like the
> level of developer discussion that one would want to see. And that
> compounds when considered in light of the proxy commits.
I don't think that e-mails copied to another mailing list count as
activity. By that measure spam would also count. Until last week,
there had not been a single message dealing with code that was checked
in either prior to or after the checkin.
>
>> and license problems not being responded to "despite requests from
>> the
> mentors".
>
> That happened back in October. The last message I see on the subject
> was from Ted in November, saying: "I sent a note about that to
> heraldry- dev and heard crickets in response." On the other hand, the
> Mentors are posting little more than a message a month, each, so there
> isn't much hands-on guidance.
We've also been attempting to get some parties/corporations to respond
via off-list e-mails, which as you can see, have not been particularly
successful either.
>
> Clearly there needs to be some corrective action, and more guidance on
> how an ASF project is supposed to conduct itself.
That's not much of a plan, which is what the board is asking for.
Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here, besides upping
the number of messages that say "please talk to us on the
list". But given that development is happening somewhere else, I
am doubtful as to whether that would make any difference. Late
today a thread started up which clearly shows that some amount of
development is happening elsewhere: <http://mail-archive.com/heraldry-
dev%40incubator.apache.org/msg00147.html>. I would definitely
appreciate concrete suggestions of things to do.
Ted
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 1/31/07, Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On 1/31/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> > For example, rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> > is due (and, factually, finishing herding tardy projects the day that the
> > report is filed), we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each month,
> > or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to review and approve
> > the report before it is submitted to the Board.
>
> Sure - that could work - anything which enforces a review prior to it
> landing in the Board's lap is an improvement.
it would allow (not enforce) a review so it's probably a good idea
maybe a little more ceremony would be a good useful
perhaps the official report could be assemble in subversion using RTC
from submissions on the wiki (a variation of dim's suggestion)
perhaps the community should approve an initial draft with a vote 3
+1's required
i'm not sure we have any process in place for missed reports
asking for reports to be submitted in good time would allow the PMC to
ask that the mentors agree a report if the community fails to create
one in time
we should also ask for a report to be agreed by the community
immediately and definitely before the next board meeting
maybe the three month rule for regular reporting also needs to be
thought about. i'm not so worried about a project that takes a while
to bootstrap: it can take a long time to sort out legal paperwork but
maybe the regular reporting needs to continue until the project is
operating normally.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 1/31/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> For example, rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> is due (and, factually, finishing herding tardy projects the day that the
> report is filed), we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each month,
> or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to review and approve
> the report before it is submitted to the Board.
Sure - that could work - anything which enforces a review prior to it
landing in the Board's lap is an improvement. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Alex Karasulu <ao...@bellsouth.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 1/31/07, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1. How about we add a section on the wiki page where each pmc member
>> can signoff as having reviewed the report.
>
> Good idea. How about if 3 Incubator PMC members have not reviewed
> each podling's report, it is removed before it is submitted to the
> Board? -- justin
Sounds reasonable. +1
Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 1/31/07, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1. How about we add a section on the wiki page where each pmc member
> can signoff as having reviewed the report.
Good idea. How about if 3 Incubator PMC members have not reviewed
each podling's report, it is removed before it is submitted to the
Board? -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
+1. How about we add a section on the wiki page where each pmc member
can signoff as having reviewed the report.
-- dims
On 1/31/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> > The only thing that slightly annoyed the Board was that *we* had to
> > red-flag it - which means that the Incubator PMC is not reviewing
> > the reports as a whole before it is sent to the Board.
>
> I wonder if anyone other than me is reading everything before or even after
> it is submitted. And without the Mentors actively flagging "HOUSTON, WE
> HAVE A *PROBLEM*", it is likely that people skim reports without noticing
> the problem.
>
> > One suggestion could be to have an IRC (or even via phone) meeting
> > of the Incubator PMC before the Board meeting
>
> That would almost certainly be logistically infeasible. On a personal note,
> it would likely result in my resigning as PMC Chair for the same reason that
> I annually disqualify myself from running for Board election. However, if
> the goal is to prod the Incubator PMC into more closely reviewing the status
> reports, we could try an alternative.
>
> For example, rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> is due (and, factually, finishing herding tardy projects the day that the
> report is filed), we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each month,
> or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to review and approve
> the report before it is submitted to the Board.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://wso2.org/ :: Oxygen for Web Services Developers
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hola,
On 1/31/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Yoav Shapira wrote:
>
> > Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > > rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> > > is [due], we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each
> > > month, or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to
> > > review and approve the report before it is submitted to the Board.
>
> > +1. Sometimes when I notice stuff that I want to ask about, or maybe
> > have a report amended to address something, it's usually too late and
> > too close to the Board meeting. Having a bit more review time would
> > help.
>
> Would you mind going through the board calendar (in SVN) and setting up the
> remaining 2007 wiki pages, with cut-off dates in the main index page?
This is basically done now.
> What do people think of adding a column to
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects for when each project has to report?
+1.
Yoav
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On 1/31/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Would you mind going through the board calendar (in SVN) and setting up the
> remaining 2007 wiki pages, with cut-off dates in the main index page?
No, I don't particularly mind. I'll try to do it by the weekend.
> What do people think of adding a column to
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects for when each project has to report?
+1.
Yoav
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Yoav Shapira wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> > is [due], we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each
> > month, or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to
> > review and approve the report before it is submitted to the Board.
> +1. Sometimes when I notice stuff that I want to ask about, or maybe
> have a report amended to address something, it's usually too late and
> too close to the Board meeting. Having a bit more review time would
> help.
Would you mind going through the board calendar (in SVN) and setting up the
remaining 2007 wiki pages, with cut-off dates in the main index page?
What do people think of adding a column to
http://incubator.apache.org/projects for when each project has to report?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hola,
On 1/31/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> I wonder if anyone other than me is reading everything before or even after
I try, but...
> For example, rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> is due (and, factually, finishing herding tardy projects the day that the
> report is filed), we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each month,
> or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to review and approve
> the report before it is submitted to the Board.
+1. Sometimes when I notice stuff that I want to ask about, or maybe
have a report amended to address something, it's usually too late and
too close to the Board meeting. Having a bit more review time would
help.
Yoav
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
On Jan 31, 2007, at 6:32 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> I wonder if anyone other than me is reading everything before or
> even after
> it is submitted.
I tend to read all board reports, and read the ones for which I'm on
a PMC, or previously was a (formal or not) mentor for, completely. I
usually get to that on average a half-month after the board has a
meeting (eg read them once every two months). :/
- LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 2/2/07, Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org> wrote:
> I see it as more of a chance for the Incubator PMC to ask for
> additional details, clarifications, and amendments to reports from
> podlings, rather than a more strict +1/0/-1 vote. In that regard, it
> would be similar to the Directors' comments on TLP reports, which tend
> to essentially be questions and requests for clarifications that the
> TLP then addresses as needed.
>
> I would hope that podlings act on this feedback from the Incubator PMC
> in a timely manner, and ideally update their Board reports in time for
> the Board meeting.
Exactly. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On 2/2/07, Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net> wrote:
> I assume that vote would just be about the reports submitted by podlings, not your personal > notes add to the report ? The latter shouldn't be subject to votes in my opinion..
I see it as more of a chance for the Incubator PMC to ask for
additional details, clarifications, and amendments to reports from
podlings, rather than a more strict +1/0/-1 vote. In that regard, it
would be similar to the Directors' comments on TLP reports, which tend
to essentially be questions and requests for clarifications that the
TLP then addresses as needed.
I would hope that podlings act on this feedback from the Incubator PMC
in a timely manner, and ideally update their Board reports in time for
the Board meeting.
Yoav
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change to Board reporting process
Posted by Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> For example, rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
> is due (and, factually, finishing herding tardy projects the day that the
> report is filed), we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each month,
> or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to review and approve
> the report before it is submitted to the Board.
>
I assume that vote would just be about the reports submitted by podlings, not your personal notes
add to the report ? The latter shouldn't be subject to votes in my opinion..
Mvgr,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Change to Board reporting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> The only thing that slightly annoyed the Board was that *we* had to
> red-flag it - which means that the Incubator PMC is not reviewing
> the reports as a whole before it is sent to the Board.
I wonder if anyone other than me is reading everything before or even after
it is submitted. And without the Mentors actively flagging "HOUSTON, WE
HAVE A *PROBLEM*", it is likely that people skim reports without noticing
the problem.
> One suggestion could be to have an IRC (or even via phone) meeting
> of the Incubator PMC before the Board meeting
That would almost certainly be logistically infeasible. On a personal note,
it would likely result in my resigning as PMC Chair for the same reason that
I annually disqualify myself from running for Board election. However, if
the goal is to prod the Incubator PMC into more closely reviewing the status
reports, we could try an alternative.
For example, rather than close the cat-herding the weekend before the report
is due (and, factually, finishing herding tardy projects the day that the
report is filed), we could set a cut-off of the second Monday of each month,
or similarly appropriate date, and give the PMC a week to review and approve
the report before it is submitted to the Board.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 1/31/07, Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
> > Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here, besides
> > upping the number of messages that say "please talk to us on the
> > list".
>
> When you need to say that more than once every three months, there's
> a problem. I think submitting a frank and open report was exactly the
> right action to take.
Yes - this is *exactly* what we want mentors to do - thanks!
The only thing that slightly annoyed the Board was that *we* had to
red-flag it - which means that the Incubator PMC is not reviewing the
reports as a whole before it is sent to the Board. One suggestion
could be to have an IRC (or even via phone) meeting of the Incubator
PMC before the Board meeting to review the podling's status reports.
The Board does review each and every report that is submitted, but
it'd be nice if the Incubator PMC were to step up a bit here too. --
justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
Hey Ted,
Bottom line: there's some issues with the heraldry community to fix,
it's their responsibility to fix it, looks like you guys did a good
job of that so far to me, we should give heraldry some more time to
try and fix things.
On Jan 30, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
> Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here, besides
> upping the number of messages that say "please talk to us on the
> list".
When you need to say that more than once every three months, there's
a problem. I think submitting a frank and open report was exactly the
right action to take.
> But given that development is happening somewhere else
Yep. I just reviewed the commits archive, and its quite obvious. I
see about three big code drops (maybe you want to look at how harmony
did IP clearance on these kinds of big drops. Having some rigid
physical seperation between "drop box" and "proper" helped in many
ways I think besides just IP clearance).
> , I am doubtful as to whether that would make any difference.
> Late today a thread started up which clearly shows that some amount
> of development is happening elsewhere: <http://mail-archive.com/
> heraldry-dev%40incubator.apache.org/msg00147.html>. I would
> definitely appreciate concrete suggestions of things to do.
Seems like a hard thing to get right. I don't like "just can it" very
much as an approach, but I agree it's on the table now.
The committers on heraldry have so far just not made enough (visible)
effort to change their processes to be open-source-y, it is a
problem, you've mentioned it to them gently a few times, now I hope
the message has gotten across in a not-so-gentle way too.
It is up to *them* to figure out what to do and how to do it, and to
do so in public, on heraldry-dev. I think they've gotten enough
hints, it looks like some people are forming plans, in their heads,
which need to solidify and be brought to the mailing list.
If I were a heraldry mentor, I would see what happens over the next
two weeks, and be on ready stand-by to answer any questions, and be
ready to participate in my role as mentor in any discussion happening
on heraldry mailing lists. I don't think it should be up to you to
formulate the detailed plan.
If I were a committer on heraldry, I would start with immediately
(better late than never) investigating
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-heraldry-dev/
200701.mbox/%3c45A06FDC.7070607@apache.org%3e
and what happened there, in a lot of detail, gather my thoughts, and
reply to it. When a mentor says "I'm half thinking all of these
commits should be vetoed", that **is a very serious thing which
should pop up on the top of each committer's agenda to deal with
properly**, and then they should reply to it on the development
mailing list. When a mentor says "Why are you committing changes for
other people?", **a committer just might be violating the CLA
agreement signed with the ASF, and it's definitely violating
incubation standards and policies**, and its even more important, and
all committers share responsibility for dealing with it.
The next time a message like that goes unanswered for several weeks,
the project should be shut down immediately.
If I were the incubator PMC responding to the board's request, I would
* discuss what to do on this mailing list (in progress)
* notify the heraldry community of the situation (done)
* transfer responsibility to follow up with a plan of
action onto the heraldry community (todo, ted or paul)
* provide (mentor-based) support in formulating that plan
(reactive)
* put a deadline on formulation of that plan of 3 weeks (Feb 15)
* submit it as part of the next board report (Feb 16)
* report back to the board this is our rough plan (Feb 16)
hope this helps,
/LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> Bill, do you have some cycles to spare helping out with this project?
I'll periodically poke my nose in to help - but it won't be in the next
three weeks. I'll certainly observe enough to offer them some thoughts
for their 1/month report updates, in terms of moving things in the right
direction.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Ted Leung wrote:
> > Clearly there needs to be some corrective action, and more guidance
> > on how an ASF project is supposed to conduct itself.
> That's not much of a plan, which is what the board is asking for.
Perhaps not, but it got folks talking. :-)
> Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here
> given that development is happening somewhere else, I am doubtful as
> to whether that would make any difference. Late today a thread
> started up which clearly shows that some amount of development is
> happening elsewhere
> I would definitely appreciate concrete suggestions of things to do.
As noted by Dims and Bill (and acknowledged by David Recordon), the
community either shapes up or we close it down. It is either The Apache Way
or the highway, so to speak, and they need to get that message. I'm not
averse to giving them a chance to correct things, now that the gravity of
the situation is made clear, but I'm also not at all unwilling to shut it
down if they don't make those changes promptly.
Bill, do you have some cycles to spare helping out with this project?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry
Posted by Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>.
On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> The ASF Board, by Cliff Schmidt, wrote:
>
>> The report on Heraldry mentions a "single large block checkin"
>
> Two large block check-ins in January. One for python, one for
> ruby. It
> seems as if most of the development is happening off-line and being
> committed by proxy. Paul Querna posted one message raising those
> concerns.
> There were no replies, and he didn't follow up.
>
>> "almost no activity" on the dev list
>
> Almost none is a tad of a stretch, but certainly nothing like the
> level of
> developer discussion that one would want to see. And that
> compounds when
> considered in light of the proxy commits.
I don't think that e-mails copied to another mailing list count as
activity. By that measure spam would also count. Until last week,
there had not been a single message dealing with code that was
checked in either prior to or after the checkin.
>
>> and license problems not being responded to "despite requests from
>> the
> mentors".
>
> That happened back in October. The last message I see on the
> subject was
> from Ted in November, saying: "I sent a note about that to heraldry-
> dev and
> heard crickets in response." On the other hand, the Mentors are
> posting
> little more than a message a month, each, so there isn't much hands-on
> guidance.
We've also been attempting to get some parties/corporations to
respond via off-list e-mails, which as you can see, have not been
particularly successful either.
>
> Clearly there needs to be some corrective action, and more guidance
> on how
> an ASF project is supposed to conduct itself.
That's not much of a plan, which is what the board is asking for.
Paul and I are about at our wit's end on what to do here, besides
upping the number of messages that say "please talk to us on the
list". But given that development is happening somewhere else, I
am doubtful as to whether that would make any difference. Late
today a thread started up which clearly shows that some amount of
development is happening elsewhere: <http://mail-archive.com/heraldry-
dev%40incubator.apache.org/msg00147.html>. I would definitely
appreciate concrete suggestions of things to do.
Ted
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org