You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwhisk.apache.org by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> on 2018/12/03 09:59:48 UTC
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:52 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> I cloned the September report, updated the basic statistics, and did a very fast first path. It needs more work.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97552251 ...
Note that the report should be filed by this Wednesday December 5th.
-Bertrand
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Justin Mclean <jm...@apache.org>.
Hi,
> I'm not sure whether this quarterly report is the appropriate venue
> to raise this issue, but the project currently only has two mentors.
Yep that should go in the report.
> I've done the release manager role for 1 package release so far, but to me it
> seems that our release process is being impeded by a lack of engagement
> from eligible voters on the IPMC mailing list.
The IPMC is aware of the issue and is currently doing something about that. I also see that several people on your PPMC that are also IPMC member and can vote on releases there. There's also one person that may be a good candidate for IPMC membership (hint hint).
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
Yeah that was outdated I send an email to the dev list when we got the VMs
in October that I checked that they worked in Apache Jenkins.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 9:29 AM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Thanks Dave for moving the report and others for correcting Adobe donation
> of staging VMs as I was not aware of its status since the last report and
> left the legacy text.
>
> I will be back in the "office" Monday from visiting my daughter and her
> newly upgraded family in Chi Town if anyone needs me to follow-up on any
> issues.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Date: 12/06/2018 08:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
>
>
>
> The draft report has been moved to the incubator wiki [1]. Mentors,
> please
> sign-off and add any comments you have.
>
> thanks,
>
> --dave
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2018
>
>
>
>
>
> --
Carlos Santana
<cs...@gmail.com>
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Thanks Dave for moving the report and others for correcting Adobe donation
of staging VMs as I was not aware of its status since the last report and
left the legacy text.
I will be back in the "office" Monday from visiting my daughter and her
newly upgraded family in Chi Town if anyone needs me to follow-up on any
issues.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 12/06/2018 08:58 AM
Subject: Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
The draft report has been moved to the incubator wiki [1]. Mentors,
please
sign-off and add any comments you have.
thanks,
--dave
[1]
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2018
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
The draft report has been moved to the incubator wiki [1]. Mentors, please
sign-off and add any comments you have.
thanks,
--dave
[1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2018
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 2:37 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...I don't appear to have the permissions to edit this page [2]...
I see that you got access now, thanks for taking care of the report!
-Bertrand
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
Justin Mclean <jm...@apache.org> wrote on 12/05/2018 06:17:15 PM:
>
> Also your report is now overdue and needs to be submitted ASAP or
> you be asked to report again next month.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
The draft report is complete in our Cwiki [1]. I am happy to submit it
ASAP, but I don't appear to have the permissions to edit this page [2].
Justin or Bertrand, could you help with that?
thanks,
--dave
[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97552251
[2] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2018
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Justin Mclean <jm...@apache.org>.
Hi,
Also your report is now overdue and needs to be submitted ASAP or you be asked to report again next month.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Thanks Dave,
I will reflect this in the quarterly report.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 12/03/2018 09:00 AM
Subject: Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
"Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 12/03/2018 09:14:15 AM:
>
> Thanks Bertrand, will work in this today.
>
Hi Matt,
I'm not sure whether this quarterly report is the
appropriate venue
to raise this issue, but the project currently only has two mentors. I've
done the release manager role for 1 package release so far, but to me it
seems that our release process is being impeded by a lack of engagement
from eligible voters on the IPMC mailing list.
--dave
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
To help with the confusion I try to clean up the "releases" github pages
for both CLIs wsk and wskdeploy
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-cli/releases
The tag "latest" means nightly and is mark in red as "pre-release"
Apache OpenWhisk Releases right now should be tag as x.y.z-incubating and
is mark in green "latest-releaes"
Any tags with `x.y.z` this are old before we cut the first Apache OpenWhisk
release.
One weird thing I found was in wskdeploy there is a 0.9;9 and
0.9.8-incubating, I left 0.9.9 just in case someone is using the convenient
binaries
Can't remember if I created that tag or someone else.
But it would not matter that much if we cut another release of the CLIs
soon, and then we can delete this 0.9.8 binaries
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 12:03 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:32 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > ...https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-website/pull/353 ...
>
> Thank you very much for this. I like it, with a few minor comments.
>
> I'd prefer saying "Apache Releases" or "Apache OpenWhisk Releases"
> instead of "Official Releases".
>
> It would be good to link to
> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html somewhere, to provide
> background information.
>
> > In some special cases, Committers on the project may choose to use
> > GitHub to tag certain builds...
>
> Does that automatically cause those builds to appear as releases like
> at https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases ?
> If not, GitHub tags are perfectly ok of course, but I think the mix of
> Apache Releases and tagged builds there is a major source of confusion
> and should be avoided.
>
> I would expect tags to appear only at (for example)
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/tags - and
> document tag naming conventions might be useful for clarity if there
> are none so far.
>
> -Bertrand
>
--
Carlos Santana
<cs...@gmail.com>
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>.
Hi Bertrand,
I hope I addressed some of your most recent comments with my PRs today. Please view the updated page here: https://openwhisk.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html
Thanks,
Matt
On 2018/12/12 08:02:48, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:32 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-website/pull/353 ...
>
> Thank you very much for this. I like it, with a few minor comments.
>
> I'd prefer saying "Apache Releases" or "Apache OpenWhisk Releases"
> instead of "Official Releases".
>
> It would be good to link to
> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html somewhere, to provide
> background information.
>
> > In some special cases, Committers on the project may choose to use
> > GitHub to tag certain builds...
>
> Does that automatically cause those builds to appear as releases like
> at https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases ?
> If not, GitHub tags are perfectly ok of course, but I think the mix of
> Apache Releases and tagged builds there is a major source of confusion
> and should be avoided.
>
> I would expect tags to appear only at (for example)
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/tags - and
> document tag naming conventions might be useful for clarity if there
> are none so far.
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Matt,
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:32 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-website/pull/353 ...
Thank you very much for this. I like it, with a few minor comments.
I'd prefer saying "Apache Releases" or "Apache OpenWhisk Releases"
instead of "Official Releases".
It would be good to link to
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html somewhere, to provide
background information.
> In some special cases, Committers on the project may choose to use
> GitHub to tag certain builds...
Does that automatically cause those builds to appear as releases like
at https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases ?
If not, GitHub tags are perfectly ok of course, but I think the mix of
Apache Releases and tagged builds there is a major source of confusion
and should be avoided.
I would expect tags to appear only at (for example)
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/tags - and
document tag naming conventions might be useful for clarity if there
are none so far.
-Bertrand
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
In order to address confusion immediately, I created a section named
"Developer builds" and set about to create unambiguous text to position
these as unofficial "nightly" (or interim) builds with no status, as well
as rename the current "Releases" as "Official Releases" and augmented its
text as well to clarify their standing.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-website/pull/353 - "Clarify
GitHub nightly-interim releases tags from Apache releases."
Please review/comment... would like to merge the PR if no one has any
major objections and with all things can accept subsequent PRs/issues if
we want more changes/text.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: "Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 12/10/2018 01:01 PM
Subject: Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
I will update the release page to explain the purpose of the nightly
builds.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 12/07/2018 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:27 PM Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> ...Your suggesting that when we do the next source release with a new
version
> of the CLI we always include a disclaimer clarifying that the nightly
> binary “latest” is not the released version it should not be use...
No - what I suggest is including on the OpenWhisk release management
page a note on the purpose of these nightly builds, so that current
and future (P)PMC members can refer to that and know what is what.
And also remove the confusing mixes of these nightly builds,
unofficial releases (which should not exist) and Apache releases like
at
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases
-Bertrand
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
I will update the release page to explain the purpose of the nightly
builds.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 12/07/2018 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:27 PM Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> ...Your suggesting that when we do the next source release with a new
version
> of the CLI we always include a disclaimer clarifying that the nightly
> binary “latest” is not the released version it should not be use...
No - what I suggest is including on the OpenWhisk release management
page a note on the purpose of these nightly builds, so that current
and future (P)PMC members can refer to that and know what is what.
And also remove the confusing mixes of these nightly builds,
unofficial releases (which should not exist) and Apache releases like
at
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases
-Bertrand
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:27 PM Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...Your suggesting that when we do the next source release with a new version
> of the CLI we always include a disclaimer clarifying that the nightly
> binary “latest” is not the released version it should not be use...
No - what I suggest is including on the OpenWhisk release management
page a note on the purpose of these nightly builds, so that current
and future (P)PMC members can refer to that and know what is what.
And also remove the confusing mixes of these nightly builds,
unofficial releases (which should not exist) and Apache releases like
at https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases
-Bertrand
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
This are nightly builds for cicd integration.
We don’t link to them or document them from our website.
Your suggesting that when we do the next source release with a new version
of the CLI we always include a disclaimer clarifying that the nightly
binary “latest” is not the released version it should not be use, that
users to get the released need to go to the website download page and the
correct artifacts will be linked there
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:40 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:40 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> ...I haven't checked all OpenWhisk repositories but there's also at
> least
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-cli/releases
> >
> > Here I think the problem is the 'latest' tag/release. This is actually a
> > nightly build that we need to publish somewhere so that other parts of
> our
> > CI/CD pipeline can pick up pre-built CLIs...
>
> Ok, got it. Nightly builds are fine, and having them named "latest" is
> ok as far as I'm concerned but their purpose should be documented in
> the OpenWhisk release instructions so that the intention is clear.
>
> As per http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#host-rc such
> builds "should not be hosted or linked on pages intended for end
> users" so I think having them in GitHub repositories is fine, that's
> clearly a place for developers.
>
> On the other hand, as you mention, the mix of such builds with Apache
> Releases and "other" releases like at
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases needs
> to be addressed, and OpenWhisk release instructions probably need an
> update to clarify what goes where.
>
> Thanks for your prompt reply on this!
>
> -Bertrand
>
--
Carlos Santana
<cs...@gmail.com>
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Dave,
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:40 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> ...I haven't checked all OpenWhisk repositories but there's also at least
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-cli/releases
>
> Here I think the problem is the 'latest' tag/release. This is actually a
> nightly build that we need to publish somewhere so that other parts of our
> CI/CD pipeline can pick up pre-built CLIs...
Ok, got it. Nightly builds are fine, and having them named "latest" is
ok as far as I'm concerned but their purpose should be documented in
the OpenWhisk release instructions so that the intention is clear.
As per http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#host-rc such
builds "should not be hosted or linked on pages intended for end
users" so I think having them in GitHub repositories is fine, that's
clearly a place for developers.
On the other hand, as you mention, the mix of such builds with Apache
Releases and "other" releases like at
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases needs
to be addressed, and OpenWhisk release instructions probably need an
update to clarify what goes where.
Thanks for your prompt reply on this!
-Bertrand
Re: "nightly" releases of clis (was Graduation)
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote on 12/06/2018 03:37:15
AM:
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 12:55 AM Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > ...what you mean by releases directly from github
> > without PMC votes?
> > All our releases have gone thru Votes first and then publish into the
> > Apache server, and link in the website.
> > http://openwhisk.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html
>
> I'm thinking for example of
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases
> which seems to be a mix of Apache and non-Apache releases - highly
> confusing if that's the case.
Yes. The wskdeploy github release page is a mix. This should be addressed
somehow.
>
> I haven't checked all OpenWhisk repositories but there's also at least
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-cli/releases
>
> I don't think the Incubator PMC has voted on those, unless I missed
something.
>
Here I think the problem is the 'latest' tag/release. This is actually a
nightly build that we need to publish somewhere so that other parts of our
CI/CD pipeline can pick up pre-built CLIs. If this "release" was named
"nightly" instead of "latest" or otherwise indicated as a non-official
release in the github metadata while still being named "latest", would that
work?
--dave
Re: Graduation (was: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 12:55 AM Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...what you mean by releases directly from github
> without PMC votes?
> All our releases have gone thru Votes first and then publish into the
> Apache server, and link in the website.
> http://openwhisk.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html ...
I'm thinking for example of
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-wskdeploy/releases
which seems to be a mix of Apache and non-Apache releases - highly
confusing if that's the case.
I haven't checked all OpenWhisk repositories but there's also at least
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-cli/releases
I don't think the Incubator PMC has voted on those, unless I missed something.
-Bertrand
-Bertrand
Re: Graduation (was: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 12:55 AM Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bertrand wrote:
> >1) How to ensure someone following just this list can follow the
>> action...
> Bertrand for the information item I think best visible place would be the
> website, improve it with more info and guidance on how to contribute and
> where to look and maybe more links to the biweekly notes, and monthly
> reports...
Yes, and this is something that the PPMC needs to tackle - not the
mentors who are here to give advice and help the project progress
towards graduation.
We had a discussion about this on the community dev list recently [1]
("Discussions in pull requests vs. dev list"). There were no black and
white conclusions but it might provide useful input on how to come up
with an "OpenWhisk guide on how to follow the action" or something.
-Bertrand
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a90d871d7e8637b7ed566bcc5f06a9920b480097647d1b70424fce1e@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b0146edd7fefd1810c4150bedfd5b6566bf49099d19ae7658142df28@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E
Re: Graduation (was: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018)
Posted by Justin Mclean <jm...@apache.org>.
Hi,
> I don't think this is blocker to graduate, having releases (ie source tgz)
> is the minimum requirement.
It is IMO (with my IPMC hat on). Any released convenance binaries must be based on a source release. [1]
Thanks,
Justin
1. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages
Re: Graduation (was: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018)
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
The position of the ASF is that the foundation release source artifacts
only.
For convenient binaries/artifacts I agree they are useful to provide, but
there are not consider a release or artifacts that we need a vote on it.
I don't think this is blocker to graduate, having releases (ie source tgz)
is the minimum requirement.
After graduation we can continue the discussion and implementation on of
this convenient official/blessed artifacts (docker image, maven, npm) via
ASF automation process after doing a release
>1) How to ensure someone following just this list can follow the
action. Might be solved by just clearly documenting where to look so
that newbies and occasional contributors can jump in easily, and
making sure the places that are linked to don't require permanent
attention.
Bertrand for the information item I think best visible place would be the
website, improve it with more info and guidance on how to contribute and
where to look and maybe more links to the biweekly notes, and monthly
reports
>2) Clarifying where and how releases happen, last time I looked (2-3
months ago?) some "releases" were still happening directly from GitHub
repositories without Incubator PMC votes.
Bertrand I don't follow what you mean by releases directly from github
without PMC votes?
All our releases have gone thru Votes first and then publish into the
Apache server, and link in the website.
http://openwhisk.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html
And we will continue releasing new modules, and releasing updates to
already released modules.
I think Vincent will cut another release of core and java for the package
namespace rename
I think Dave will do the composer-python onced legally cleared
I have intentions to release new runtimes ruby,go and updated ones
I think the Train of releases will continue at faster pace hopefully as we
improve docs and tools to help release manager to go thru the voting and
publishing or releases.
-- Carlos
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 3:01 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote on 12/03/2018 10:51:24
> AM:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 4:00 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > ...it
> > > seems that our release process is being impeded by a lack of engagement
> > > from eligible voters on the IPMC mailing list...
> >
> > I agree, and besides having more mentors one way to fix that is to
> > graduate ;-)
>
> +1
>
> >
> > From my point of view as one incubation mentor there are two things
> > that need to be addressed before graduation, and both might not need a
> > lot of work, I just might not have the right information to consider
> > these issues solved.
> > ...
> > 2) Clarifying where and how releases happen, last time I looked (2-3
> > months ago?) some "releases" were still happening directly from GitHub
> > repositories without Incubator PMC votes.
> >
>
> Agreed. There is still work to be done to formalize and automate our
> releases. This is especially true around the reality of users expecting to
> consume pre-built artifacts from dockerhub, maven, npmjs, pypi, homebrew,
> etc. IMO the project does not yet have a good handle on how we get from
> official Apache source releases to the artifacts that users will actually
> consume from these diverse channels.
>
> A vanishingly small fraction of users actually want (or are even able to)
> to take a source release and build it themselves, especially across all the
> different technologies that make up OpenWhisk.
>
> --dave
>
--
Carlos Santana
<cs...@gmail.com>
Re: Graduation (was: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018)
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote on 12/03/2018 10:51:24
AM:
>
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 4:00 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...it
> > seems that our release process is being impeded by a lack of engagement
> > from eligible voters on the IPMC mailing list...
>
> I agree, and besides having more mentors one way to fix that is to
> graduate ;-)
+1
>
> From my point of view as one incubation mentor there are two things
> that need to be addressed before graduation, and both might not need a
> lot of work, I just might not have the right information to consider
> these issues solved.
> ...
> 2) Clarifying where and how releases happen, last time I looked (2-3
> months ago?) some "releases" were still happening directly from GitHub
> repositories without Incubator PMC votes.
>
Agreed. There is still work to be done to formalize and automate our
releases. This is especially true around the reality of users expecting to
consume pre-built artifacts from dockerhub, maven, npmjs, pypi, homebrew,
etc. IMO the project does not yet have a good handle on how we get from
official Apache source releases to the artifacts that users will actually
consume from these diverse channels.
A vanishingly small fraction of users actually want (or are even able to)
to take a source release and build it themselves, especially across all the
different technologies that make up OpenWhisk.
--dave
Graduation (was: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 4:00 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...it
> seems that our release process is being impeded by a lack of engagement
> from eligible voters on the IPMC mailing list...
I agree, and besides having more mentors one way to fix that is to graduate ;-)
From my point of view as one incubation mentor there are two things
that need to be addressed before graduation, and both might not need a
lot of work, I just might not have the right information to consider
these issues solved.
1) How to ensure someone following just this list can follow the
action. Might be solved by just clearly documenting where to look so
that newbies and occasional contributors can jump in easily, and
making sure the places that are linked to don't require permanent
attention.
2) Clarifying where and how releases happen, last time I looked (2-3
months ago?) some "releases" were still happening directly from GitHub
repositories without Incubator PMC votes.
That's just off the top of my mind, Jim your second mentor might have
other points to look at and in the end graduation is an Incubator PMC
decision.
But I think graduating might not be too much work at this stage,
provided someone from the PPMC takes the lead. I don't want to do
that, as the initiative and energy has to come from PPMC members.
-Bertrand
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
"Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 12/03/2018 09:14:15 AM:
>
> Thanks Bertrand, will work in this today.
>
Hi Matt,
I'm not sure whether this quarterly report is the appropriate venue
to raise this issue, but the project currently only has two mentors. I've
done the release manager role for 1 package release so far, but to me it
seems that our release process is being impeded by a lack of engagement
from eligible voters on the IPMC mailing list.
--dave
Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Thanks Bertrand, will work in this today.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 12/03/2018 04:06 AM
Subject: Re: Podling Report Reminder - December 2018
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:52 PM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> I cloned the September report, updated the basic statistics, and did a
very fast first path. It needs more work.
>
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97552251
...
Note that the report should be filed by this Wednesday December 5th.
-Bertrand