You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> on 2006/11/10 16:18:16 UTC
[DISCUSS] incubator voting process
There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
is where incubation happens. The reality is that all the real
incubating happens on the PPMC private and dev lists.
We can correct this in one of two ways: recognize what actually is
happening, or make what we say is happening actually work.
If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation are
posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours to raise
an issue.
If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that most
PMC members participate in most votes.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Nov 10, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> There seems to be a persistent delusion that
> general@incubator.apache.or is where incubation happens. The
> reality is that all the real incubating happens on the PPMC private
> and dev lists.
>
> We can correct this in one of two ways: recognize what actually is
> happening, or make what we say is happening actually work.
>
> If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
> announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation
> are posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours
> to raise an issue.
>
> If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that
> most PMC members participate in most votes.
>
I view general@incubator as a podling-wide mailing list,
where podlings can share experience and lessons-learned.
A sort of group mind of all podlings, so to speak.
But *how* each individual podling "matures" and
"grows" and "incubates" is a personal journey done
on the podling PPMC and dev lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Nov 10, 2006, at 7:18 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> There seems to be a persistent delusion that
> general@incubator.apache.or is where incubation happens. The
> reality is that all the real incubating happens on the PPMC private
> and dev lists.
>
> We can correct this in one of two ways: recognize what actually is
> happening, or make what we say is happening actually work.
>
> If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
> announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation
> are posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours
> to raise an issue.
>
> If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that
> most PMC members participate in most votes.
Sorry Sam, that is absolute nonsense. The reason why we have a
minimal quorum requirement of three +1 votes is so that the vast
majority of PART-TIME, VOLUNTEER open source developers can focus
on what is important for them today. In particular, a +1 vote to
release should never be given by ANYONE unless they are reasonably
sure that the release is good for Apache. It is the responsibility
of the people who want to make a release (on any project) to
attract enough real review from responsible PMC members to generate
the three +1 votes. If the product cannot attract that many votes
with relative ease, then there is obviously something wrong with
the release (socially or technically) and it should not be forced out.
It should be left on the pile of almost-done releases, with a note
to the effect of "needs more review".
If a podling has enough committers to vote for a release, the IP
constraints have been cleared (a prerequisite), the mentors
have voted for the release, and they *still* don't have enough
binding +1 votes to actually make the release even when the rest of
the Incubator PMC is off in the woods navel-gazing, then that
podling SHOULD HAVE ALREADY GRADUATED.
Apache Jackrabbit did only one release in incubator. It is not
necessary for podlings to generate PUBLIC releases every few weeks
just to hit a milestone. Just do one. A podling with an active
community and proven IP-completion should prepare one release,
seek out individual reviews if necessary, and then graduate.
The last thing we need is for Incubator PMC members to be guilted
into voting for a release that they care nothing about.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> wrote:
>> If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
>> announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation are
>> posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours to raise
>> an issue.
>
> I've been advising podlings with three mentors to conduct release
> votes on their dev list, but ping the mentors beforehand to make sure
> they vote. Then, having three PMC +1s, they should forward the vote
> results from their dev list to this list to allow the rest of the PMC
> 72 hours to raise any concerns. If no response, the release goes out
> based on the earlier three PMC votes.
Sounds good to me.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Fwd: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>.
Hey folks,
Some of you may have seen this discussion on the incubator general
list about how podlings should vote for releases. I just thought I
should probably forward my response to the discussion since we're
talking about releases lately. Let me know if I need to clarify
anything or if you have questions/concerns about my view on how this
should be done.
Cliff
On 11/10/06, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
> > announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation are
> > posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours to raise
> > an issue.
>
> I've been advising podlings with three mentors to conduct release
> votes on their dev list, but ping the mentors beforehand to make sure
> they vote. Then, having three PMC +1s, they should forward the vote
> results from their dev list to this list to allow the rest of the PMC
> 72 hours to raise any concerns. If no response, the release goes out
> based on the earlier three PMC votes.
>
> If one of the mentors doesn't want to +1 it, that's a problem that
> should be discussed in any case. If a mentor doesn't have time to
> review the occasional release of their podling, they probably
> shouldn't be a mentor.
>
> I prefer to keep the release vote on the podling's dev list where
> their community lives; I also prefer to reduce the noise on this list
> for uneventful project-specific release votes.
>
> > If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that most
> > PMC members participate in most votes.
>
> I don't think this is ever going to happen. I sure hope no one on the
> PMC votes for the release of a product they haven't taken a close look
> at (not making technical judgements, but everything else). And I
> really doubt, with the number of podlings that the average PMC member
> will have time to do this in most cases
>
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/06, Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> wrote:
> If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
> announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation are
> posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours to raise
> an issue.
I've been advising podlings with three mentors to conduct release
votes on their dev list, but ping the mentors beforehand to make sure
they vote. Then, having three PMC +1s, they should forward the vote
results from their dev list to this list to allow the rest of the PMC
72 hours to raise any concerns. If no response, the release goes out
based on the earlier three PMC votes.
If one of the mentors doesn't want to +1 it, that's a problem that
should be discussed in any case. If a mentor doesn't have time to
review the occasional release of their podling, they probably
shouldn't be a mentor.
I prefer to keep the release vote on the podling's dev list where
their community lives; I also prefer to reduce the noise on this list
for uneventful project-specific release votes.
> If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that most
> PMC members participate in most votes.
I don't think this is ever going to happen. I sure hope no one on the
PMC votes for the release of a product they haven't taken a close look
at (not making technical judgements, but everything else). And I
really doubt, with the number of podlings that the average PMC member
will have time to do this in most cases
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> People like Robert have been complete stud muffins in this regards.
> Big kudos to him and RAT. It's been a major step forward and I'm very
> thankful for his recent efforts.
Robert has been a huge help, and I'd like to encourage the use of RAT
ASF-wide, and at least as a pre-requisite for Incubator releases.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 11/10/06, Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
> I mean at the very least I would expect to see +1 votes from the
> project mentors as soon as the vote thread starts on
> general@incubator, since at least in theory if there was anything that
> would keep them from voting +1 they would have raised it on the
> project's dev list before it got anywhere near asking for the
> incubator's blessing. Right there that's at least one or two votes,
> if the project has trouble getting the remaining votes, well, maybe
> that says something about the level of interest in the rest of the
> foundation about the project itself. If we can't get three people on
> the incubator PMC motivated enough to say "yes, this release looks
> legally and procedurally sound" then maybe we shouldn't have the
> project at the ASF at all.
+1.
I view it as extremely unreasonable to expect every PMC member to vote
on every release. What I do not find unreasonable is that the mentors
vote on the release for their podlings and whomever else is interested
who is an Incubator PMC member reviews the release and votes. Once
that happens, then I think it's quite clear that the balance of the
3-vote minimum will likely be met or exceeded.
People like Robert have been complete stud muffins in this regards.
Big kudos to him and RAT. It's been a major step forward and I'm very
thankful for his recent efforts. *smooch* =) -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/06, Daniel Kulp <da...@iona.com> wrote:
> On Friday November 10 2006 11:06 am, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> > I mean at the very least I would expect to see +1 votes from the
> > project mentors as soon as the vote thread starts on
> > general@incubator, since at least in theory if there was anything that
> > would keep them from voting +1 they would have raised it on the
> > project's dev list before it got anywhere near asking for the
> > incubator's blessing. Right there that's at least one or two votes,
> > if the project has trouble getting the remaining votes, well, maybe
> > that says something about the level of interest in the rest of the
> > foundation about the project itself. If we can't get three people on
> > the incubator PMC motivated enough to say "yes, this release looks
> > legally and procedurally sound" then maybe we shouldn't have the
> > project at the ASF at all.
>
> I'm +1 on this, but there is one problem:
>
> In the last couple months, I've seen MULTIPLE instances where the mentors
> for various projects (according to their proposal and STATUS pages)
> didn't even know they were mentors for the project. I've seen responses
> like "I didn't look at it or vote because I didn't know I was a mentor."
>
> That's definitely a huge issue. I think periodically, the incubator PMC
> should contact the mentors of each project directly and double check
> that:
> 1) That person is still interested in being a mentor
> 2) That person still has the time to be a mentor
> 3) That person knows they ARE a mentor
I've not set the auto-reminder email up yet for incubator reports. I
was planning to send them to the private-ppmc mailing lists, but the
negative here is that they may not exist and for tlp's we currently
just send it to the chair.
I think sending it to the mentors might be an interesting alternative:
"As a mentor of XXX, you are going to be interested to know that a
report is due this month".
> I'm seeing too many projects where the mentors seem to be "non-existent"
> for whatever reason. (a lot of mentors are over committed) Thus, it's
> hard to get the mentors to vote. If that's the case, we really should
> try and find new (or at least additional) mentors for the project.
Part of this is due to what we expect of a mentor.
When I started mentoring Roller I thought I was meant to lead and try
and get things moving to graudation. I did happen to be a Roller
committer before it joined the ASF, but trying to do this utterly
burnt up the time I had for Roller and damaged my personal interest in
Roller. Being ever present, involved in development conversations and
yet focused on the graduation subjects doesn't work and isn't in
keeping with what I think of when I think of the word 'mentor'.
OpenEJB is going much better - the community are responsible for
incubating and graduating. I (and the other mentors) are there for
advice on how to do things, to get the ppmc up and running and to take
the role a chair would usually take (we request new users, let the
community know that they need to produce a report, inform
pmc@incubator of votes). That fits the word 'mentor' for me.
In both cases it's hard to get me to notice a vote - I don't read
every email in the dev/user list, I surf a combination of the two in
gmail periodically. So in both cases I need the community to kick me
in the shins and make sure I know there's a vote that needs mentor
involvement (release/new-committer) - I (or one of the other two
mentors) are then responsible for making sure that all 3 mentors vote
on it, or failing that to take it to general@incubator.
It's been a learning experience - apologies to Roller for having to
deal with me learning :)
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Daniel Kulp wrote:
> In the last couple months, I've seen MULTIPLE instances where the mentors
> for various projects (according to their proposal and STATUS pages)
> didn't even know they were mentors for the project. I've seen responses
> like "I didn't look at it or vote because I didn't know I was a mentor."
I agree that (and related) are issues. Dave Reid's work may provide us with
better tools for managing the people/project relationships.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Daniel Kulp <da...@iona.com>.
On Friday November 10 2006 11:06 am, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> I mean at the very least I would expect to see +1 votes from the
> project mentors as soon as the vote thread starts on
> general@incubator, since at least in theory if there was anything that
> would keep them from voting +1 they would have raised it on the
> project's dev list before it got anywhere near asking for the
> incubator's blessing. Right there that's at least one or two votes,
> if the project has trouble getting the remaining votes, well, maybe
> that says something about the level of interest in the rest of the
> foundation about the project itself. If we can't get three people on
> the incubator PMC motivated enough to say "yes, this release looks
> legally and procedurally sound" then maybe we shouldn't have the
> project at the ASF at all.
I'm +1 on this, but there is one problem:
In the last couple months, I've seen MULTIPLE instances where the mentors
for various projects (according to their proposal and STATUS pages)
didn't even know they were mentors for the project. I've seen responses
like "I didn't look at it or vote because I didn't know I was a mentor."
That's definitely a huge issue. I think periodically, the incubator PMC
should contact the mentors of each project directly and double check
that:
1) That person is still interested in being a mentor
2) That person still has the time to be a mentor
3) That person knows they ARE a mentor
I'm seeing too many projects where the mentors seem to be "non-existent"
for whatever reason. (a lot of mentors are over committed) Thus, it's
hard to get the mentors to vote. If that's the case, we really should
try and find new (or at least additional) mentors for the project.
--
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 F:781-902-8001
daniel.kulp@iona.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On 11/10/06, Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
> Personally, when I'm voting with my Incubator PMC hat on, I'm voting
> based on the fact that the project has followed the ASF guidelines for
> how to prepare and vote on a release, and that we've legally speaking
> got all our ducks in a row (i.e. CLAs are in, all the appropriate
> license files and headers are in place, etc).
>
> When I'm voting as a committer on the project that's when I take into
> account technical merit of the release, although at that phase (before
> it gets to the incubator PMC) I would also bring up any problems that
> I'm aware of that would convince me to not +1 it with my Incubator PMC
> hat on.
This summarizes neatly the way I tend to look at it as well. I would
only add the when voting as a mentor for a particular project, I try
to do both of the above (IPMC and committer) together.
Yoav
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
> Garrett raises a point about which I want to ask.
> What criteria should a mentor use when it comes to
> voting on a release? I for one can't make any
> judgement of its technical worth..
Personally, when I'm voting with my Incubator PMC hat on, I'm voting
based on the fact that the project has followed the ASF guidelines for
how to prepare and vote on a release, and that we've legally speaking
got all our ducks in a row (i.e. CLAs are in, all the appropriate
license files and headers are in place, etc).
When I'm voting as a committer on the project that's when I take into
account technical merit of the release, although at that phase (before
it gets to the incubator PMC) I would also bring up any problems that
I'm aware of that would convince me to not +1 it with my Incubator PMC
hat on.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Garrett raises a point about which I want to ask.
> What criteria should a mentor use when it comes to
> voting on a release? I for one can't make any
> judgement of its technical worth..
The technical quality of the release process - are there any legal
problems in the dependencies, are files licensed correctly, gpg signed
etc. RAT basically :) Can you build the source, is there an svn tag,
how do the release notes read.
With Roller I do install it and try it out because I happen to be a
user, but with OpenEJB I'm not going to have that luxury.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Ken wrote:
> Garrett raises a point about which I want to ask.
> What criteria should a mentor use when it comes to
> voting on a release? I for one can't make any
> judgement of its technical worth.
IMO: IP issues and decision making process. And RAT. And, of course, the
Mentor is able to also bring his or her own technical expertise on the
subject matter to bear, should there be such.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Garrett raises a point about which I want to ask.
What criteria should a mentor use when it comes to
voting on a release? I for one can't make any
judgement of its technical worth..
- --
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQCVAwUBRVSwMZrNPMCpn3XdAQJgWgQAtWyjZvSD1VnfN98Y/7i5tLQbRu9Nz2qZ
sDRFG87XOMWDrf9+4+BcwJu5B1CXvjx4mJsgPsirw/ZVw2iY21NU/MNN9vyAVHB0
80lZrBhxr61FyKoMmIcBoEnw73N9Awjewo/2eTs+Dgq5WVRBZafdrNAdPw4YD24/
NSqRXFTOTjc=
=Agne
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > That may be true, but as ASF Members (which most are), I would expect
(and
> > have observed) that they have an overall concern regarding events that
> > effect the ASF.
> Sure, but having an overall concern about events that effect the ASF
> is different from having the time to make sure that $RANDOM_PODLING's
> latest release happens in a timely manner. For example, I don't
> personally care all that much about quite a few of our current
> podlings (just not interested in them from a technical point of view),
> so I probably wouldn't go out of my way to review their releases.
Neither do I, but I do want to be notified that they are having a vote in a
timely manner in case I do care, and I want to receive the vote results so
that I can review them, myself, to verify that sufficient Mentors did have
their eyes on the vote.
As I said, the only vote that I think should be on general@ is the
graduation vote.
> That said, if I noticed something particularly wrong and didn't see
> someone else speaking up about it, I'd do something, because like you
> say, I'm a member and I care about the ASF in general.
Exactly.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 11/12/06, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> That may be true, but as ASF Members (which most are), I would expect (and
> have observed) that they have an overall concern regarding events that
> effect the ASF.
Sure, but having an overall concern about events that effect the ASF
is different from having the time to make sure that $RANDOM_PODLING's
latest release happens in a timely manner. For example, I don't
personally care all that much about quite a few of our current
podlings (just not interested in them from a technical point of view),
so I probably wouldn't go out of my way to review their releases.
That said, if I noticed something particularly wrong and didn't see
someone else speaking up about it, I'd do something, because like you
say, I'm a member and I care about the ASF in general.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/06, Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> wrote:
> > There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
> > is where incubation happens. The reality is that all the real
> > incubating happens on the PPMC private and dev lists.
> >
> > We can correct this in one of two ways: recognize what actually is
> > happening, or make what we say is happening actually work.
> >
> > If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
> > announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation are
> > posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours to raise
> > an issue.
That's how I treat it - if I can get enough PMC votes without having
to call a vote here.
> > If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that most
> > PMC members participate in most votes.
>
> I think it's unrealistic to expect that the majority of the members of
> the incubator PMC will be involved in most votes. I mean heck, I've
> rarely seen the majority of PMC members of any project be involved in
> ANY release vote, let alone in a situation like the incubator where
> many PMC members have little personal interest in the majority of the
> releases.
Yup - the Incubator is not a community. It'll always be a community of
communities like the ASF.
> Honestly though, if podlings are having trouble getting people on the
> PMC to review and vote on their releases I wonder if that says
> something in and of itself.
Usually that they predate the realisation that a podling needs 3
mentors to not have this problem.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> I think it's unrealistic to expect that the majority of the members of
> the incubator PMC will be involved in most votes.
The Incubator PMC is the second largest in the ASF, and likely to become the
largest in short order. As long as we have sufficient oversight, I agree
with you.
> As far as I can tell, most people who are on the incubator PMC joined
> so they could help to shepherd a specific project through the process
> by serving as a mentor.
That may be true, but as ASF Members (which most are), I would expect (and
have observed) that they have an overall concern regarding events that
effect the ASF.
Personally, my view has been consistent. Most votes regarding a podling can
and should be on their own lists. The PMC should be notified of all such
votes in a timely manner in case other PMC members want to involve
themselves. [And this is why I keep raising the issue of every podling
having at least 3 mentors, so that they have sufficient binding votes.]
Votes to graduate a project should be, IMO, held on
general@incubator.apache.org.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 11/10/06, Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> wrote:
> There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
> is where incubation happens. The reality is that all the real
> incubating happens on the PPMC private and dev lists.
>
> We can correct this in one of two ways: recognize what actually is
> happening, or make what we say is happening actually work.
>
> If we go the first route, then we should treat this list as an
> announcements list. Results of votes for releases and graduation are
> posted here, and incubator PMC members will be given 72 hours to raise
> an issue.
>
> If we go the second route, then we need to set the expectation that most
> PMC members participate in most votes.
I think it's unrealistic to expect that the majority of the members of
the incubator PMC will be involved in most votes. I mean heck, I've
rarely seen the majority of PMC members of any project be involved in
ANY release vote, let alone in a situation like the incubator where
many PMC members have little personal interest in the majority of the
releases.
As far as I can tell, most people who are on the incubator PMC joined
so they could help to shepherd a specific project through the process
by serving as a mentor. They don't have the time or the inclination
to police the releases of each and every project in incubation, and
requiring them to do so seems like a great way to just get them to say
the hell with it and leave the PMC entirely, which doesn't solve
anything. I mean before at least they were helping to police the
releases of at least the podling they were involved in, which is
better than nothing.
Honestly though, if podlings are having trouble getting people on the
PMC to review and vote on their releases I wonder if that says
something in and of itself.
I mean at the very least I would expect to see +1 votes from the
project mentors as soon as the vote thread starts on
general@incubator, since at least in theory if there was anything that
would keep them from voting +1 they would have raised it on the
project's dev list before it got anywhere near asking for the
incubator's blessing. Right there that's at least one or two votes,
if the project has trouble getting the remaining votes, well, maybe
that says something about the level of interest in the rest of the
foundation about the project itself. If we can't get three people on
the incubator PMC motivated enough to say "yes, this release looks
legally and procedurally sound" then maybe we shouldn't have the
project at the ASF at all.
(Note, please don't take this as me pointing at any particular project
and saying "nobody cares about your stuff, take a hike", I'm not
interested in having that argument right now, but I am interested in
the bigger picture.)
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
> 1. Abdera:
> Mentors: Garrett Rooney, Paul Querna
> Started: July 2006
> Incomplete: Identification, Interim Responsibility, Copyright
> Diversity: Unknown
> Releases: Unknown
FWIW, when Ken pointed out to me that it was pretty incomplete I went
in and updated the status page. I believe everything on the default
status list is complete. I didn't list releases (didn't occur to me,
I'll go add them to the "news" section soon), and diversity is ok, but
not perfect (we've got at least three independent committers, but the
majority of the coding still comes from IBM, although not all of it).
Other than that the only thing left to deal with that I'm aware of is
we need to do the crypto notification stuff for our use of Bouncy
Castle in the security component.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
"Collaborative Development" items on Incubator status pages (was
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process)
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
Craig L Russell wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2006, at 7:03 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
>
>> On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 6. Cayenne:
>>> Mentors: Jean Anderson, Brian McAllister, Bill Dudney
>>> Started: March 2006
>>> Incomplete: Nothing
>>> Diverity: Unknown
>>> Releases: 1
>>
>>
>> All eight of the Cayenne committers are independent of each other.
>> How should we note this on our status page? Unfortunately, there's
>> only one "no" and the rest are all "unknowns" so there's no model to
>> work from.
>
> I think this is a factor in the "Diversity" category. This category
> tries to represent the independence of committers from each other (and
> employers from each other). A sentence that states "All eight of the
> Cayenne committers are independent of each other" is a very powerful
> affirmation of diversity.
>
>> Should we take the "Collaborative development" questions and make them
>> into status items?
The text immediately above the Collaborative Development section says
"These items are not to be signed as done during incubation, as they may
change during incubation. They are to be looked into and described in
the status reports and completed in the request for incubation signoff."
That wording is still in the template at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/projects/incubation-status-template.xml
, but I see that many status pages are adding answers, so I just updated
the cayenne status page.
Should we change the template to remove "These items are not to be
signed as done during incubation"? And perhaps turn these into status
items as Mike suggested? --If people will scan the status pages for
answers, then we should indicate that answers should be filled in.
-jean
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
On Nov 10, 2006, at 7:03 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
>> 6. Cayenne:
>> Mentors: Jean Anderson, Brian McAllister, Bill Dudney
>> Started: March 2006
>> Incomplete: Nothing
>> Diverity: Unknown
>> Releases: 1
>
> All eight of the Cayenne committers are independent of each other.
> How should we note this on our status page? Unfortunately, there's
> only one "no" and the rest are all "unknowns" so there's no model to
> work from.
I think this is a factor in the "Diversity" category. This category
tries to represent the independence of committers from each other
(and employers from each other). A sentence that states "All eight of
the Cayenne committers are independent of each other" is a very
powerful affirmation of diversity.
>
> Should we take the "Collaborative development" questions and make them
> into status items?
>
> One of these questions seems unnecessary: "Are the decision-making
> guidelines published and agreed to by all of the committers?" To the
> best of my knowledge, there's only one way to do this as an ASF
> project -- discuss decisions on the dev mailing lists and vote, with
> binding votes cast by (P)PMC members. Maybe it should be rephrased
> along the lines of "Are all committers aware of the ASF
> decision-making guidelines?"
Yeah, I agree that the guidelines for decision-making are documented.
So you are correct to interpret this as you indicate.
To make this more formal, you could patch the guidelines page and see
if others in incubator agree. <shields up/>
Craig
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
> 6. Cayenne:
> Mentors: Jean Anderson, Brian McAllister, Bill Dudney
> Started: March 2006
> Incomplete: Nothing
> Diverity: Unknown
> Releases: 1
All eight of the Cayenne committers are independent of each other.
How should we note this on our status page? Unfortunately, there's
only one "no" and the rest are all "unknowns" so there's no model to
work from.
Should we take the "Collaborative development" questions and make them
into status items?
One of these questions seems unnecessary: "Are the decision-making
guidelines published and agreed to by all of the committers?" To the
best of my knowledge, there's only one way to do this as an ASF
project -- discuss decisions on the dev mailing lists and vote, with
binding votes cast by (P)PMC members. Maybe it should be rephrased
along the lines of "Are all committers aware of the ASF
decision-making guidelines?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Sam Ruby wrote:
> >
> >> There seems to be a persistent delusion that
> >> general@incubator.apache.or is where incubation happens.
> >
> > That is perjorative. Want to start again?
>
> I just spent a considerable amount of time going through
> all the podling status pages,
Thanks for doing this Ken. The biggest argument for wanting uniformity
is being able to generate these kind of reports in the future without
sucking up such time.
> 26. Roller:
> Mentors: Sam Ruby, Henri Yandell
> Started: January 2006
> Incomplete: Copyright, Distribution, Infrastructure
> Diversity: Unknown
> Releases: 1
I just checked Distribution off. We had some BCL jars in our first
release - javamail and activation, that's now fixed with release 2
(I'll email about getting them removed from release 1). Copyright is
still outstanding - there are some copyrights in the source that are
not listed in NOTICE.txt.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@golux.com> wrote:
> 18. Lucene4c:
> Mentors: Erik Hatcher
> Started: Unknown
> Incomplete: All
> Diversity: Unknown
> Releases: Unknown
Also FWIW, this one has been retired, I just hadn't updated its status
page to note that fact. Checked in that change, but haven't pushed it
out due to other weirdness with the web site...
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 11/13/06, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Ken wrot:
<snip>
> > Worse, there are some that have made releases while the IP
> > issues -- according to the status page -- are still in doubt.
>
> :-( Error in oversight by us, then. What kind(s) of IP issues?
i've only just started to check the status page - i had assumed that
mentors would ensure all IP issues were clear before even thinking
about a release.
of course, not all IP issues listed on the status page prevent a
release. for example, the last tuscany release had issues listed in
the status page. it turned out that the software grants had been in
place for months so a release was safe.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
automate everything! (was: Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process)
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
On Nov 11, 2006, at 12:05 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> (On a side note: To be perfectly frank, it makes me cringe
> to see this horribly effort-intensive and error-prone process
> being used by the ASF. IMHO, all this stuff should be
> regularised and normalised and maintained via Web forms. If
> I don't get shouted down, maybe I'll work on that. ;-)
I'll shout up. Go, ken, go!
/LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Ken wrot:
> I just spent a considerable amount of time going through
> all the podling status pages, and there's a certain..
> lack of uniformity about them. I've attached the results.
Thank you for doing that, Ken. :-)
I've noted the same when doing spot checks in the past, as have (for
example) Roy and Robert. I keep wondering what we need to do to encourage
people to keep the files current. We've already tried making them a
pre-condition for releases and graduation.
> The status pages don't really have check-off points for
> at least two of the graduation criteria: diversity and
> 'has released something.'
No one has updated the template since the "has released something" topic
switched from being something discouraged to something required. Actually,
the templates haven't been changed in years, so perhaps we should take
advantage of a switch to the work that Dave Reid has been preparing to
review and revise. Is that something you would be interested in helping
with? You seem to imply such, below:
> (On a side note: To be perfectly frank, it makes me cringe
> to see this horribly effort-intensive and error-prone process
> being used by the ASF. IMHO, all this stuff should be
> regularised and normalised and maintained via Web forms. If
> I don't get shouted down, maybe I'll work on that. ;-)
> Worse, there are some that have made releases while the IP
> issues -- according to the status page -- are still in doubt.
:-( Error in oversight by us, then. What kind(s) of IP issues?
> Noel, that's an observation of something I consider to
> be a serious problem, and that I think we should try
> to fix (assuming others think it's a problem as well).
+1
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> There seems to be a persistent delusion that
>> general@incubator.apache.or is where incubation happens.
>
> That is perjorative. Want to start again?
I just spent a considerable amount of time going through
all the podling status pages, and there's a certain..
lack of uniformity about them. I've attached the results.
The status pages don't really have check-off points for
at least two of the graduation criteria: diversity and
'has released something.' I inferred release information
where I could easily do so. Crude, so don't expect too
much of it; just meant to be a high-level skim.
There are some podlings which have been there for years
but haven't checked everything off yet; there are others
which have been there for only a few months and *have* finished
them. Worse, there are some that have made releases while
the IP issues -- according to the status page -- are still
in doubt.
(On a side note: To be perfectly frank, it makes me cringe
to see this horribly effort-intensive and error-prone process
being used by the ASF. IMHO, all this stuff should be
regularised and normalised and maintained via Web forms. If
I don't get shouted down, maybe I'll work on that. ;-)
The result is that I'm not the least bit surprised that
there's so much inclarity about just what the hell is
going on in the incubator. And that's not pejorative,
Noel, that's an observation of something I consider to
be a serious problem, and that I think we should try
to fix (assuming others think it's a problem as well).
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Ken asked:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
>>> is where incubation happens.
>> That is perjorative. Want to start again?
> What the flying moose ears is wrong with people today?
> Everyone seems to be hyper-sensitive and twitchy.
It has been a touchy subject, it is worth discussing, and Sam's lead-in
included an attack on anyone not sharing his view. I simply asked that he
raise the level of discourse.
I've posted separately what votes I think should happen on which lists.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
>> is where incubation happens.
>
> That is perjorative. Want to start again?
What the flying moose ears is wrong with people today?
Everyone seems to be hyper-sensitive and twitchy.
Let's first agree on what 'incubation' means, as used
in 'where incubation happens.' Sam?
If it means communities growing and adopting the
Apache paradigm, then I have to agree with Sam -- that
doesn't happen on the general list.
- --
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQCVAwUBRVSxGZrNPMCpn3XdAQLBZQP/fYOL0xZfyiAWgaHL2qQFSpRcr8+LvA8T
rrVNFdIyzubnzIX+EPR99ZiZlmSiby5ftKY2WedRKweZxBlCLlXAXU7xbwh5uL02
CpFS7PaZ1iYG01CrU0QZOk5vvcgvyUif0yNptzMaUqT+jSL8efstWnGRwphxnR7/
dppQchxyYzA=
=EqDw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> I call on those who wish to set the expectation that certain votes are
> to occur on this list to actively foster the notion that people who are
> members of this PMC are expected to actively participate.
> Better?
Yes. :-)
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
>> is where incubation happens.
>
> That is perjorative.
Indeed. It is rather rare to see such from me, wouldn't you say?
Perhaps I feel rather strongly about the current state of this ever
burgeoning umbrella PMC.
> Want to start again?
I call on those who wish to set the expectation that certain votes are
to occur on this list to actively foster the notion that people who are
members of this PMC are expected to actively participate.
Better?
> --- Noel
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] incubator voting process
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> There seems to be a persistent delusion that general@incubator.apache.or
> is where incubation happens.
That is perjorative. Want to start again?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org