You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@milagro.apache.org by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org> on 2017/06/25 10:25:15 UTC
[DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
All,
I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
list activity nor commits happening.
John
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by larry mccay <lm...@apache.org>.
My humble opinion is that the Milagro mentors guide the project to follow
the simplest and most clear definition of the Apache Way for communication
and openness. Drop your reliance on external channels until and only if
they can be used to complement the main channels.
Mailing lists are your communication mechanism and history of such
communication.
Many projects rely on JIRA and its email notification of activity for
communication and discussion at the feature/JIRA level.
Use Apache Git and just let the github be a mirror of Apache and have
contributors submit patches via JIRA.
You can make this a two way integration later.
It seems that reliance on previous process is getting in your way to be
successful here.
Trying to retrofit or to accommodate other preferences and things that you
are familiar with is only going to stand in your way.
Simplify and adopt the Apache Way as purely as possible then extend it in
ways that will grow your community but not just to use what you are
familiar with.
Where do the mentors stand on this?
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Patrick Hilt <pa...@miracl.com>
wrote:
> Dear all,
> It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
> through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
> we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
> it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
> certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
> project.
>
> Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
> manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
> particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
> having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
> to find about a while back).
>
> Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
> community.
>
> As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
> 1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
> Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
> domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
> here would be much appreciated!
> 2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
> (github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
> github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
> from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated
> 3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
> code, etc.
> 4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above
>
> I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
> partially.
>
> Cheers,
> Patrick
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Right. This is an issue on openness.
> >
> > We are willing to follow the openness.
> > For example, our code is open on the internet.
> > https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> > However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are
> > to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> > One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the
> > merge.
> >
> > Please advise us how we should communicate.
> >
> > NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to
> > contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think
> > the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
> >
> > I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue
> > board in GitHub.
> > All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and
> all
> > the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> > It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
> >
> > Go
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > Hi Go,
> >
> > I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> > communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> > issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to
> be
> > on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this
> is
> > not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> > likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
> >
> > You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> > decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
> >
> > The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on
> Git
> > (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
> >
> > Regards,
> > Anthony Shaw
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree we need to discuss.
> > >
> > > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in
> the
> > > level of activities.
> > >
> > > I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> > > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines
> of
> > > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> > >
> > > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.
> > For
> > > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in
> mailing
> > > lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in
> > those
> > > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> > > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > > channels. That is the problem.
> > >
> > > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not
> > an
> > > Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply
> > accustomed
> > > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> > > learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That
> is
> > > the point.
> > >
> > > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this
> project
> > > is fruitful and productive.
> > >
> > > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT,
> > and
> > > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to
> > contribute.
> > >
> > > Go
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> > > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > > To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> > > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is
> no
> > on
> > > list activity nor commits happening.
> > >
> > > John
> > > ________________________________
> > > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> > otherwise
> > > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender
> immediately
> > > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any
> attachments.
> > > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank
> > you.
> > > ________________________________
> > >
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank
> you.
> > ________________________________
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>.
I think Nick’s comment is a good point to restart.
(1) communication channel beyond ML
As far as I know Slack will not allow guests by self enrollment.
If the only problem is in openness, then how about using a Slack bot that makes public archive?
(2) source code management
We prefer a version control system integrated with an issue tracking system.
As Patric commented, GitHub and JIRA will be a popular choice, and we strongly prefer them.
Anthony suggests a contribution workflow with them. For me it looks very attractive idea for practice.
Regards,
Go Yamamoto
On Jun 28, 2017, at 1:47 AM, Nick Kew <ni...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 11:49 +0200, Patrick Hilt wrote:
Dear all,
It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
project.
Agreed there. The question is not whether it's a good project, but
whether it's an *Apache* project. I should be sorry to see it retire,
but I think if it's to stay, it needs some more committment from
the project team.
Miracl's support for Milagro does raise an issue here. One of the
most important characteristics of an Apache project is that it is
NOT so dependent on any single company as to dry up if that company
focuses elsewhere.
Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
to find about a while back).
I would echo what Anthony said in reply to Go, and add a few points.
Real-time communication channels like Slack are great, up to a point.
But they don't provide the same browsable, reviewable record as
an email archive (even if publicly archived, real-time chat is
too noisy). And Milagro's slack is in private company space
most of which is no longer open to me, let alone to a newcomer
who would like to lurk quietly before mustering the confidence
to participate.
Regarding Github integration, that situation has advanced during the
time Milagro has been incubating. The project might like to raise
the question again on general@incubator. Along with the relationship
of Apache and Github JIRA: my current impression is that the github is
the more active, though still low-volume.
Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
community.
As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
here would be much appreciated!
IRC is a popular baseline. Lots of Apache projects use Freenode.
Other channels are also acceptable: can Slack not be configured
to permit guest users?
2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
(github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated
general@incubator would be a good place to raise that. My own exposure
to full github integration is from Trafficserver, which was one
of the Apache projects to trial it. When Milagro first entered
the incubator, infra were clear: it wasn't yet being rolled out
beyond the trial projects.
3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
code, etc.
Indeed. How has staff turnover at Miracl affected the roster?
In an ideal world it shouldn't, except insofar as new developers
may be recruited to relevant work.
4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above
We have a chicken-and-egg here. An active and healthy community
draws interest. The hard part is to bootstrap that community.
Currently we have a codebase that draws some interest, generally
through github, but at a modest level. The individual who provides
fast and excellent replies to most of the github issues has (I think)
never put in an appearance at Apache.
I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
partially.
Happy to give it a try, with a couple of reservations:
(a) Concern that it might reinforce a top-down process that works in
a company context but the team needs to get away from at Apache.
(b) A hint of deja-vu.
[Go wrote re: merge of NTT codebase]
Please advise us how we should communicate.
This mailinglist is always the primary channel for project
communication. Issues raised by a large volume of NTT code
to merge with the current (Miracl) codebase might be a very
good start to substantive activity here!
Both Miracl and NTT may need to make efforts to resist a
natural temptation to make decisions in private and only
communicate to the list once decisions are made!
--
Nick Kew
________________________________
This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
________________________________
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 11:49 +0200, Patrick Hilt wrote:
> Dear all,
> It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
> through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
> we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
> it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
> certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
> project.
Agreed there. The question is not whether it's a good project, but
whether it's an *Apache* project. I should be sorry to see it retire,
but I think if it's to stay, it needs some more committment from
the project team.
Miracl's support for Milagro does raise an issue here. One of the
most important characteristics of an Apache project is that it is
NOT so dependent on any single company as to dry up if that company
focuses elsewhere.
> Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
> manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
> particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
> having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
> to find about a while back).
I would echo what Anthony said in reply to Go, and add a few points.
Real-time communication channels like Slack are great, up to a point.
But they don't provide the same browsable, reviewable record as
an email archive (even if publicly archived, real-time chat is
too noisy). And Milagro's slack is in private company space
most of which is no longer open to me, let alone to a newcomer
who would like to lurk quietly before mustering the confidence
to participate.
Regarding Github integration, that situation has advanced during the
time Milagro has been incubating. The project might like to raise
the question again on general@incubator. Along with the relationship
of Apache and Github JIRA: my current impression is that the github is
the more active, though still low-volume.
> Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
> community.
>
> As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
> 1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
> Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
> domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
> here would be much appreciated!
IRC is a popular baseline. Lots of Apache projects use Freenode.
Other channels are also acceptable: can Slack not be configured
to permit guest users?
> 2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
> (github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
> github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
> from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated
general@incubator would be a good place to raise that. My own exposure
to full github integration is from Trafficserver, which was one
of the Apache projects to trial it. When Milagro first entered
the incubator, infra were clear: it wasn't yet being rolled out
beyond the trial projects.
> 3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
> code, etc.
Indeed. How has staff turnover at Miracl affected the roster?
In an ideal world it shouldn't, except insofar as new developers
may be recruited to relevant work.
> 4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above
We have a chicken-and-egg here. An active and healthy community
draws interest. The hard part is to bootstrap that community.
Currently we have a codebase that draws some interest, generally
through github, but at a modest level. The individual who provides
fast and excellent replies to most of the github issues has (I think)
never put in an appearance at Apache.
> I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
> partially.
Happy to give it a try, with a couple of reservations:
(a) Concern that it might reinforce a top-down process that works in
a company context but the team needs to get away from at Apache.
(b) A hint of deja-vu.
[Go wrote re: merge of NTT codebase]
> > Please advise us how we should communicate.
This mailinglist is always the primary channel for project
communication. Issues raised by a large volume of NTT code
to merge with the current (Miracl) codebase might be a very
good start to substantive activity here!
Both Miracl and NTT may need to make efforts to resist a
natural temptation to make decisions in private and only
communicate to the list once decisions are made!
--
Nick Kew
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Patrick Hilt <pa...@miracl.com>.
Dear all,
It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
project.
Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
to find about a while back).
Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
community.
As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
here would be much appreciated!
2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
(github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated
3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
code, etc.
4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above
I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
partially.
Cheers,
Patrick
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> Right. This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are
> to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the
> merge.
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to
> contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think
> the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue
> board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all
> the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> ________________________________________
> From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.
> For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in
> those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels. That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not
> an
> > Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply
> accustomed
> > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> > learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> > the point.
> >
> > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> > is fruitful and productive.
> >
> > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT,
> and
> > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to
> contribute.
> >
> > Go
> > ________________________________________
> > From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no
> on
> > list activity nor commits happening.
> >
> > John
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank
> you.
> > ________________________________
> >
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>.
Hello everybody,
it is a pity. it seems to me, that's a kind lack of leadership and missed
communcation on this.
BR,
Giorgio
2017-06-26 5:31 GMT+02:00 Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>:
> Right. This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are
> to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the
> merge.
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to
> contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think
> the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue
> board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all
> the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> ________________________________________
> From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.
> For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in
> those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels. That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not
> an
> > Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply
> accustomed
> > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> > learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> > the point.
> >
> > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> > is fruitful and productive.
> >
> > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT,
> and
> > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to
> contribute.
> >
> > Go
> > ________________________________________
> > From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no
> on
> > list activity nor commits happening.
> >
> > John
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank
> you.
> > ________________________________
> >
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Patrick Hilt <pa...@miracl.com>.
I agree that Slack is too restrictive... I think I mentioned that in my
previous email. TBH, we should get rid of the Milagro Slack channel... I do
think it would be good to have a realtime communication channel but I guess
email / mailing list would be a start.
One more comment, from the MIRACL side, I'm planning for our Labs team to
(continue) to contribute to Milagro and help move it forward.
Just to reiterate, we need a clean starting point in the official Milagro
repo. To get there, we need to "audit" where code is currently located and
what code it is based on.
Finally, just one more question... again... someone in this thread said
earlier that a lot of Apache projects use GitHub which is something I think
we'd prefer for Milagro as well. Is there a "recommended" way of using
GitHub rather than the Apache git repo directly?
Thanks,
Patrick
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Nick Kew <ni...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 08:41 +0000, Nikolai Stoilov wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Just to add a couple notes, the slack that was set up for the project is
> > https://milagro.slack.com/
>
> Two quite serious problems with that one.
>
> > I don't know why it isn't referenced on the project's website, but it
> > allows for people with emails @miracl.com, @apache.org, @milagro.io, @
> > ntti3.com, @po.ntts.co.jp, @lab.ntt.co.jp, @mulodo.com to sign
> themselves
> > up.
>
> That is fine for people already involved, but does nothing to
> open it to interested outsiders - including those who might,
> if made welcome, become the core developers of the future.
> It's too exclusive. Even saying "just ask to join" can be
> a hurdle to the initially-timid.
>
> > Also, there is a slack bot installed that sends all conversations as
> > emails
> > to a selected address.
>
> Yes, I've seen that. It's very inhibiting. There are occasions
> when it makes sense (e.g. to archive a formal meeting), but for
> general chat it's the last thing you want! And I'd hate to try
> and dig through interactive chat to *find* anything!
>
> That inhibition is probably why I've *never* seen traffic on
> the channel!
>
> --
> Nick Kew
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@apache.org>.
On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 08:41 +0000, Nikolai Stoilov wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Just to add a couple notes, the slack that was set up for the project is
> https://milagro.slack.com/
Two quite serious problems with that one.
> I don't know why it isn't referenced on the project's website, but it
> allows for people with emails @miracl.com, @apache.org, @milagro.io, @
> ntti3.com, @po.ntts.co.jp, @lab.ntt.co.jp, @mulodo.com to sign themselves
> up.
That is fine for people already involved, but does nothing to
open it to interested outsiders - including those who might,
if made welcome, become the core developers of the future.
It's too exclusive. Even saying "just ask to join" can be
a hurdle to the initially-timid.
> Also, there is a slack bot installed that sends all conversations as
> emails
> to a selected address.
Yes, I've seen that. It's very inhibiting. There are occasions
when it makes sense (e.g. to archive a formal meeting), but for
general chat it's the last thing you want! And I'd hate to try
and dig through interactive chat to *find* anything!
That inhibition is probably why I've *never* seen traffic on
the channel!
--
Nick Kew
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Nikolai Stoilov <ni...@miracl.com>.
Hi everyone,
Just to add a couple notes, the slack that was set up for the project is
https://milagro.slack.com/
I don't know why it isn't referenced on the project's website, but it
allows for people with emails @miracl.com, @apache.org, @milagro.io, @
ntti3.com, @po.ntts.co.jp, @lab.ntt.co.jp, @mulodo.com to sign themselves
up. As far as I understand, each commiter should have an Appache ID
(associated with an @apache.org email), so they can use that to sign up.
Also, there is a slack bot installed that sends all conversations as emails
to a selected address.
The Jira set up for the project is
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MILAGRO
It should also be accessible through Apache IDs, though I don't remember if
additional steps are required to gain access.
Thanks,
Nikolai
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 1:55 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Go,
>
> On 2017-06-29 19:00 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > If you are looking for persons who are to blame, probably you will find
> me one of them.
>
> I'm by no means trying to find people to blame. My objective is to look
> at each podling out there and make sure it's viable enough to be a project.
>
> >
> > I believe we all of us want to make this project fruitful and successful.
> > So I will explain the reason why, since it will be useful to identify
> what we should discuss/learn/install to solve the problem.
> >
> > First, we made https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT not intended to be a
> fork of incubator-Milagro, but a fork from
> > Miracl’s original repositories. https://github.com/miracl
> > It is because NTT have been working together with Miracl to develop the
> very first version of public Milagro.
> >
> > We supposed our code is merged at Miracl’s repo and pushed to the
> incubator-milagro.
> > However, as far as I know, Miracl had a difficulty because of
> unfortunate significant changes.
> >
> > Probably we should have communicated in this ML that we need to rethink
> who will make the initial commit, looking at the repo with no initial
> commitment for months.
> > My apologies, we could talk better if I were more experienced in Apache
> projects.
>
> This is actually an incredibly useful explanation. Thank you for it. So
> with Miracl not supporting the work, do you feel comfortable as an
> individual committing to the ASF hosted repository instead of the github
> repository created by NTT? If not, what could we do to help you get there?
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Go Yamamoto
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2017, at 5:28 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Go,
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <yamamoto.go@ntti3.com<mailto:
> yamamoto.go@ntti3.com>> wrote:
> > Right. This is an issue on openness.
> >
> > We are willing to follow the openness.
> > For example, our code is open on the internet.
> > https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> >
> > It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.
> >
> > However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that
> are to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> > One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the
> merge.
> >
> > This is odd to me. Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge?
> You are a committer on the project. Feel free to commit straight to
> master. Granted, I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.
> >
> > Do you have pull requests open?
> >
> >
> > Please advise us how we should communicate.
> >
> > I would recommend just sending emails to dev@. See who responds.
> >
> >
> > NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to
> contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think
> the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
> >
> > With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested
> in the project?
> >
> >
> > I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue
> board in GitHub.
> > All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and
> all the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> > It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
> >
> > Go
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: anthony shaw <anthonyshaw@apache.org<mailto:anthonyshaw@apache.org
> >>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org<mailto:
> dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> > Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org<ma...@milagro.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > Hi Go,
> >
> > I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> > communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> > issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to
> be
> > on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this
> is
> > not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> > likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
> >
> > You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> > decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
> >
> > The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on
> Git
> > (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
> >
> > Regards,
> > Anthony Shaw
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.
> For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in
> those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels. That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not
> an
> > Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply
> accustomed
> > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> > learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> > the point.
> >
> > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> > is fruitful and productive.
> >
> > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT,
> and
> > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to
> contribute.
> >
> > Go
> > ________________________________________
> > From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no
> on
> > list activity nor commits happening.
> >
> > John
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank
> you.
> > ________________________________
> >
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> > ________________________________
> >
>
--
Nikolai Stoilov
NOC/Support Team Lead
MIRACL
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Go,
On 2017-06-29 19:00 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> John,
>
> If you are looking for persons who are to blame, probably you will find me one of them.
I'm by no means trying to find people to blame. My objective is to look at each podling out there and make sure it's viable enough to be a project.
>
> I believe we all of us want to make this project fruitful and successful.
> So I will explain the reason why, since it will be useful to identify what we should discuss/learn/install to solve the problem.
>
> First, we made https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT not intended to be a fork of incubator-Milagro, but a fork from
> Miraclâs original repositories. https://github.com/miracl
> It is because NTT have been working together with Miracl to develop the very first version of public Milagro.
>
> We supposed our code is merged at Miraclâs repo and pushed to the incubator-milagro.
> However, as far as I know, Miracl had a difficulty because of unfortunate significant changes.
>
> Probably we should have communicated in this ML that we need to rethink who will make the initial commit, looking at the repo with no initial commitment for months.
> My apologies, we could talk better if I were more experienced in Apache projects.
This is actually an incredibly useful explanation. Thank you for it. So with Miracl not supporting the work, do you feel comfortable as an individual committing to the ASF hosted repository instead of the github repository created by NTT? If not, what could we do to help you get there?
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
>
>
>
> On Jun 27, 2017, at 5:28 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Go,
>
>
>
> On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>> wrote:
> Right. This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
>
> It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.
>
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.
>
> This is odd to me. Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge? You are a committer on the project. Feel free to commit straight to master. Granted, I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.
>
> Do you have pull requests open?
>
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
>
> I would recommend just sending emails to dev@. See who responds.
>
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
>
> With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested in the project?
>
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> ________________________________________
> From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org<ma...@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org<ma...@milagro.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
>
> I agree we need to discuss.
>
> I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> level of activities.
>
> I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> code that wait for discussion on merge.
>
> The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For
> example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> channels. That is the problem.
>
> I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed
> to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> the point.
>
> To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> is fruitful and productive.
>
> I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
>
> Go
> ________________________________________
> From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> All,
>
> I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> list activity nor commits happening.
>
> John
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
>
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>.
John,
If you are looking for persons who are to blame, probably you will find me one of them.
I believe we all of us want to make this project fruitful and successful.
So I will explain the reason why, since it will be useful to identify what we should discuss/learn/install to solve the problem.
First, we made https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT not intended to be a fork of incubator-Milagro, but a fork from
Miracl’s original repositories. https://github.com/miracl
It is because NTT have been working together with Miracl to develop the very first version of public Milagro.
We supposed our code is merged at Miracl’s repo and pushed to the incubator-milagro.
However, as far as I know, Miracl had a difficulty because of unfortunate significant changes.
Probably we should have communicated in this ML that we need to rethink who will make the initial commit, looking at the repo with no initial commitment for months.
My apologies, we could talk better if I were more experienced in Apache projects.
Regards,
Go Yamamoto
On Jun 27, 2017, at 5:28 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>> wrote:
Go,
On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>> wrote:
Right. This is an issue on openness.
We are willing to follow the openness.
For example, our code is open on the internet.
https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.
However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.
This is odd to me. Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge? You are a committer on the project. Feel free to commit straight to master. Granted, I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.
Do you have pull requests open?
Please advise us how we should communicate.
I would recommend just sending emails to dev@. See who responds.
NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested in the project?
I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in GitHub.
All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
Go
________________________________________
From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org<ma...@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org<ma...@milagro.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Hi Go,
I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
(and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
Regards,
Anthony Shaw
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
I agree we need to discuss.
I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
level of activities.
I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
code that wait for discussion on merge.
The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For
example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
channels. That is the problem.
I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed
to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
the point.
To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
is fruitful and productive.
I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
Go
________________________________________
From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
To: dev@milagro.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
All,
I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
list activity nor commits happening.
John
________________________________
This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
________________________________
________________________________
This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
________________________________
________________________________
This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
________________________________
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>.
Here is another contribution workflow
https://libcloud.readthedocs.io/en/latest/development.html#contribution-workflow
This works with the mirrors that GitHub run for the ASF and could easily apply to this incubator.
Anthony Shaw
________________________________
From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 10:28:21 AM
To: dev@milagro.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Go,
On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> Right. This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.
This is odd to me. Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge? You are a committer on the project. Feel free to commit straight to master. Granted, I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.
Do you have pull requests open?
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
I would recommend just sending emails to dev@. See who responds.
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested in the project?
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> ________________________________________
> From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels. That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> > Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed
> > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> > learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> > the point.
> >
> > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> > is fruitful and productive.
> >
> > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
> >
> > Go
> > ________________________________________
> > From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> > list activity nor commits happening.
> >
> > John
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> > ________________________________
> >
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Go,
On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> Right. This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.
This is odd to me. Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge? You are a committer on the project. Feel free to commit straight to master. Granted, I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.
Do you have pull requests open?
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
I would recommend just sending emails to dev@. See who responds.
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested in the project?
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> ________________________________________
> From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels. That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> > Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed
> > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> > learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> > the point.
> >
> > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> > is fruitful and productive.
> >
> > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
> >
> > Go
> > ________________________________________
> > From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> > list activity nor commits happening.
> >
> > John
> > ________________________________
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> > by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> > NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> > ________________________________
> >
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>.
Right. This is an issue on openness.
We are willing to follow the openness.
For example, our code is open on the internet.
https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.
Please advise us how we should communicate.
NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea. We also think the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in GitHub.
All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
Go
________________________________________
From: anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Cc: dev@milagro.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Hi Go,
I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
(and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
Regards,
Anthony Shaw
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> I agree we need to discuss.
>
> I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> level of activities.
>
> I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> code that wait for discussion on merge.
>
> The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For
> example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> channels. That is the problem.
>
> I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed
> to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> the point.
>
> To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> is fruitful and productive.
>
> I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
>
> Go
> ________________________________________
> From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> All,
>
> I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> list activity nor commits happening.
>
> John
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
________________________________
This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
________________________________
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by anthony shaw <an...@apache.org>.
Hi Go,
I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
(and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
Regards,
Anthony Shaw
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> I agree we need to discuss.
>
> I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> level of activities.
>
> I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to
> contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> code that wait for discussion on merge.
>
> The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For
> example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the
> result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> channels. That is the problem.
>
> I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed
> to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we
> learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is
> the point.
>
> To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> is fruitful and productive.
>
> I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
>
> Go
> ________________________________________
> From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> To: dev@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> All,
>
> I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
> been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> list activity nor commits happening.
>
> John
> ________________________________
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> ________________________________
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
Posted by Go Yamamoto <ya...@ntti3.com>.
I agree we need to discuss.
I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the level of activities.
I do not think Milagro is inactive. We NTT have been trying to contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of code that wait for discussion on merge.
The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project. For example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing lists. As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces. As the result the activities are not visible from the projects' official channels. That is the problem.
I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an Apache way. I agree it makes sense. However, we are not simply accustomed to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN. Should we learn to? To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style. That is the point.
To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project is fruitful and productive.
I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
Go
________________________________________
From: John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
To: dev@milagro.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
All,
I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling. You've
been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
list activity nor commits happening.
John
________________________________
This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
________________________________