You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Christopher <ct...@apache.org> on 2017/07/03 18:11:55 UTC
[DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Greetings Incubator,
The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result of
the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our private
list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded it
did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
updated and can be found here[3].
Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to present
to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion here
and subsequent IPMC vote.
[1]:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
[2]:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
[3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
**********
Establish the Apache Fluo Project
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
(PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and hereby
is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
* Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
* Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
* Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
* Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
* Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
* Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
* Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
* Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
be it further
RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
discharged.
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
To clarify just in case it's not clear (I had to read it twice to get
it): notifications@f.a.o[1] is what Christopher meant by "the
notifications list" and is probably the discussion you're looking for,
Bertrand :)
[1] https://lists.apache.org/list.html?notifications@fluo.apache.org
On 7/10/17 10:29 AM, Christopher wrote:
> As a project which was born and raised on GitHub, Fluo makes very heavy use
> of the issue tracker for day to day decision making and asyncronous
> discussions, using GitHub issues and pull requests. We're a R-t-C
> community, and a lot of that discussion occurs during code reviews on the
> issue tracker. We've found that works very well. For ASF tracking purposes,
> it relies on infra services to CC the notifications list. New users can get
> up to speed by looking at the history there, but it's probably much easier
> to dive in to the documentation on the website and browse the discussions
> on the issue tracker threads.
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017, 07:34 Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It looks like Fluo is indeed ready to graduate but I have a question
>> about its dev list usage.
>>
>> I had a look at the Fluo dev list archive,
>> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@fluo.apache.org
>>
>> There's very little going on there in terms of technical discussions
>> and decisions, most of the traffic (and that's not much) seems to be
>> about project governance topics.
>>
>> Can someone from Fluo comment on that vs. "if it didn't happen on the
>> dev list it didn't happen" ?
>>
>> Are open asynchronous discussions happening elsewhere, and how do you
>> see newcomers getting up to speed?
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...Below is a link to our the most commented issues from all Fluo repositories
> to give you examples of our work flow:..
Thanks!
https://github.com/apache/incubator-fluo/issues/230 is a nice
example...which in the end looks very much like a mailing list
discussion would *if people are very careful about properly quoting
things* - but I agree that that's much easier to do in GitHub tickets.
Thanks Fluo team for the clarifications, this looks good to me
considering that
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?notifications@fluo.apache.org has
the complete discussion events flow.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>.
> Code reviews happens after the fact but sometimes a wild idea needs to
be discussed and fleshed out for a while before code can be written.
> Could you provide an example of such a discussion? Links to the
relevant messages are good enough, just to understand how/where things
happen.
Developers typically create a GitHub issue if they have a wild idea.
Discussion happens on the issue. If someone decides to do the work, they
can mention the issue in their pull request.
This can happen using email but I prefer communication on GitHub (or a
similar tool like GitLab) due to the seamless linking between issues, pull
requests (i.e code reviews), and commits. I find it much easier to view all
communication regarding a commit or an issue if everything is done on
GitHub rather than a combination of tools (like email, JIRA, review board,
etc).
Below is a link to our the most commented issues from all Fluo repositories
to give you examples of our work flow:
https://github.com/search?o=desc&p=1&q=is%3Aissue+repo%3Aapache%2Fincubator-fluo+repo%3Aapache%2Fincubator-fluo-recipes+repo%3Aapache%2Fincubator-fluo-website+&s=comments&type=Issues&utf8=%E2%9C%93
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:39 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <
bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> > ...As a project which was born and raised on GitHub, Fluo makes very
> heavy use
> > of the issue tracker for day to day decision making and asyncronous
> > discussions, using GitHub issues and pull requests....
>
> Ok, thanks for explaining.
>
> > ...We're a R-t-C
> > community, and a lot of that discussion occurs during code reviews on the
> > issue tracker....
>
> Code reviews happens after the fact but sometimes a wild idea needs to
> be discussed and fleshed out for a while before code can be written.
>
> Could you provide an example of such a discussion? Links to the
> relevant messages are good enough, just to understand how/where things
> happen.
>
> I don't think this has impact on the Fluo graduation but I'd like to
> understand better as I suppose your communication patterns are common
> for projects born on GitHub. It's important IMO that the Incubator
> understands them, to be able to evaluate whether our podlings are run
> in a way that's compatible with the ASF view on asynchronous open
> discussions.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...As a project which was born and raised on GitHub, Fluo makes very heavy use
> of the issue tracker for day to day decision making and asyncronous
> discussions, using GitHub issues and pull requests....
Ok, thanks for explaining.
> ...We're a R-t-C
> community, and a lot of that discussion occurs during code reviews on the
> issue tracker....
Code reviews happens after the fact but sometimes a wild idea needs to
be discussed and fleshed out for a while before code can be written.
Could you provide an example of such a discussion? Links to the
relevant messages are good enough, just to understand how/where things
happen.
I don't think this has impact on the Fluo graduation but I'd like to
understand better as I suppose your communication patterns are common
for projects born on GitHub. It's important IMO that the Incubator
understands them, to be able to evaluate whether our podlings are run
in a way that's compatible with the ASF view on asynchronous open
discussions.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
As a project which was born and raised on GitHub, Fluo makes very heavy use
of the issue tracker for day to day decision making and asyncronous
discussions, using GitHub issues and pull requests. We're a R-t-C
community, and a lot of that discussion occurs during code reviews on the
issue tracker. We've found that works very well. For ASF tracking purposes,
it relies on infra services to CC the notifications list. New users can get
up to speed by looking at the history there, but it's probably much easier
to dive in to the documentation on the website and browse the discussions
on the issue tracker threads.
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017, 07:34 Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It looks like Fluo is indeed ready to graduate but I have a question
> about its dev list usage.
>
> I had a look at the Fluo dev list archive,
> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@fluo.apache.org
>
> There's very little going on there in terms of technical discussions
> and decisions, most of the traffic (and that's not much) seems to be
> about project governance topics.
>
> Can someone from Fluo comment on that vs. "if it didn't happen on the
> dev list it didn't happen" ?
>
> Are open asynchronous discussions happening elsewhere, and how do you
> see newcomers getting up to speed?
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Hi,
It looks like Fluo is indeed ready to graduate but I have a question
about its dev list usage.
I had a look at the Fluo dev list archive,
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@fluo.apache.org
There's very little going on there in terms of technical discussions
and decisions, most of the traffic (and that's not much) seems to be
about project governance topics.
Can someone from Fluo comment on that vs. "if it didn't happen on the
dev list it didn't happen" ?
Are open asynchronous discussions happening elsewhere, and how do you
see newcomers getting up to speed?
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
I used the whimsy tool to generate the draft proposal included in this
thread. Very convenient!
My intention was to let this thread sit for the weekend, and start a VOTE
thread on Monday if no new discussion activity.
On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:38 AM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Will the podling be progressing on a vote in time for the next board report
> (7/19)? Please make sure you draft your proposal. You can take a sample
> draft from https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/fluo (it's all the way at
> the bottom)
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:55 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Thanks, John. Consider this mentor +1 then.
> >
> > On 7/5/17 7:03 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, I have no concerns with Fluo's graduation based on
> > the
> > > conversation here.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:02 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> > >>> Hi Josh,
> > >>>
> > >>> I have some questions:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got
> some
> > >> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
> > >> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I
> > think
> > >> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I
> > see
> > >> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
> > >>>
> > >>> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just
> within
> > >> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
> > >>
> > >> Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
> > >> active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
> > >>
> > >>>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings
> to
> > >> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
> > >> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a
> > difficult
> > >> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
> > >> building on top of given my view of the world).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
> > >> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to
> avoid
> > >> that.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
> > >> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
> > >> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions
> > about
> > >> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest
> > that
> > >> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of
> their
> > >> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
> > >>>
> > >>> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
> > >> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly
> > dependent
> > >> on Accumulo?
> > >>>
> > >>> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers
> were
> > >> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior
> > conversation.)
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Will the podling be progressing on a vote in time for the next board report
(7/19)? Please make sure you draft your proposal. You can take a sample
draft from https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/fluo (it's all the way at
the bottom)
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:55 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks, John. Consider this mentor +1 then.
>
> On 7/5/17 7:03 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I have no concerns with Fluo's graduation based on
> the
> > conversation here.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:02 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >>> Hi Josh,
> >>>
> >>> I have some questions:
> >>>
> >>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
> >> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
> >>>>
> >>>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
> >> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I
> think
> >> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I
> see
> >> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
> >>>
> >>> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
> >> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
> >>
> >> Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
> >> active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
> >>
> >>>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
> >> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
> >> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a
> difficult
> >> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
> >> building on top of given my view of the world).
> >>>>
> >>>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
> >> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
> >> that.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
> >> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
> >> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions
> about
> >> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest
> that
> >> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
> >> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
> >>>
> >>> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
> >> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly
> dependent
> >> on Accumulo?
> >>>
> >>> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
> >> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior
> conversation.)
> >>>
> >>
> >> Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
Thanks, John. Consider this mentor +1 then.
On 7/5/17 7:03 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> For what it's worth, I have no concerns with Fluo's graduation based on the
> conversation here.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:02 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> Hi Josh,
>>>
>>> I have some questions:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
>> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
>>>>
>>>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
>> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think
>> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see
>> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
>>>
>>> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
>> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
>>
>> Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
>> active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
>>
>>>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
>> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
>> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult
>> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
>> building on top of given my view of the world).
>>>>
>>>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
>> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
>> that.
>>>>
>>>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
>> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
>> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about
>> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that
>> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
>> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
>>>
>>> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
>> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent
>> on Accumulo?
>>>
>>> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
>> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
>>>
>>
>> Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
Thanks, John. Consider this mentor +1 then.
On 7/5/17 7:03 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> For what it's worth, I have no concerns with Fluo's graduation based on the
> conversation here.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:02 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> Hi Josh,
>>>
>>> I have some questions:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
>> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
>>>>
>>>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
>> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think
>> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see
>> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
>>>
>>> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
>> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
>>
>> Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
>> active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
>>
>>>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
>> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
>> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult
>> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
>> building on top of given my view of the world).
>>>>
>>>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
>> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
>> that.
>>>>
>>>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
>> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
>> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about
>> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that
>> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
>> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
>>>
>>> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
>> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent
>> on Accumulo?
>>>
>>> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
>> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
>>>
>>
>> Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
For what it's worth, I have no concerns with Fluo's graduation based on the
conversation here.
John
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:02 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> > Hi Josh,
> >
> > I have some questions:
> >
> >> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
> >>
> >> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think
> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see
> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
> >
> > (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
>
> Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
> active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
>
> >> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult
> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
> building on top of given my view of the world).
> >>
> >> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
> that.
> >>
> >> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about
> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that
> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
> >
> > (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent
> on Accumulo?
> >
> > (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
> >
>
> Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
On 7/5/17 1:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> I have some questions:
>
>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
>>
>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
>
> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
Yup, that sounds about right. I'm notice three of them being the most
active, but I tend to not watch that closely.
>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're building on top of given my view of the world).
>>
>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control, turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid that.
>>
>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
>
> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent on Accumulo?
>
> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
>
Will leave Christopher's response to (thoroughly) answer this ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi -
Top posting. These are all excellent reasons to remain separate.
Best Regards,
Dave
> On Jul 5, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:52 PM Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Josh,
>>
>> I have some questions:
>>
>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
>> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
>>>
>>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
>> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think
>> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see
>> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
>>
>> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
>> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
>>
>>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
>> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
>> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult
>> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
>> building on top of given my view of the world).
>>>
>>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
>> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
>> that.
>>>
>>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
>> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
>> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about
>> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that
>> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
>> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
>>
>> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
>> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent
>> on Accumulo?
>>
>>
> I'd like to answer this number (2): This possibility was mentioned by me
> after one of our previous status reports as a discussion I'd like to have
> on the list. However, I never raised it again on the list to formally
> discuss. There's a few potential reasons why I now think that might not
> work well, and why I never brought it up again (and probably why nobody
> raised it with the Accumulo PMC):
>
> 1. The committers do overlap (all but one Fluo PPMC/committer is also an
> Accumulo PMC/committer), but Accumulo's PMC is much larger than Fluo's
> PPMC. It would not make sense for the Fluo PPMC to grant majority control
> to an Accumulo PMC which does not necessarily share the consensus direction
> that Fluo is headed. I'm sure Fluo would be happy to incrementally onboard
> Accumulo developers as they began participating in Fluo development, but
> bringing them in without vetting their merits from the Fluo team's
> perspective seems like a bad idea. The Fluo team would probably prefer
> decide on the merits of new committers/PMC based on their contributions to
> Fluo, rather than automatically inherit any committers from another project.
>
> 2. While Fluo is currently implemented on Accumulo, it is not necessarily
> the intent for it to remain this way. Under an Accumulo PMC, it is likely
> this coupling would solidify, rather than be abstracted. When Fluo was
> proposed to the incubator, it was mentioned that we'd be willing to accept
> contributions to expand Fluo's feature set so that it works on other
> databases. The proposed TLP resolution reflects this willingness to expand
> beyond Accumulo by not mentioning Accumulo in its mission statement.
>
> 3. Accumulo uses a JIRA-based workflow with pull requests on GitHub and
> C-T-R. Fluo is using GitBox with R-T-C. The workflows are very different.
> Accumulo's existing bylaws explicitly contradict Fluo's own workflow that
> the developers seem comfortable with.
>
> 4. Speaking as an Accumulo PMC member, I don't know that I'd want to set a
> precedence for accepting Accumulo-related projects as subprojects of
> Accumulo, simply because it can be a bit of scope creep for Accumulo. The
> Accumulo PMC has already been approached to accept several other extensions
> to Accumulo as subprojects from "drive-by" sources who (from appearances)
> simply want to offload the maintenance work without community
> participation. I can't speak for the rest of the Accumulo PMC, but it seems
> preferable to me that the Accumulo PMC protect itself from such DOA code
> dumps by leaning towards resisting subprojects (though, having gone through
> Incubation can be proof that the code is not going to be DOA). Speaking as
> a Fluo PPMC member, I would not want to burden the Accumulo PMC with the
> responsibility to regularly evaluate whether to accept bulk code as
> subprojects, by opening those flood gates and distracting the PMC from its
> primary responsibilities to its existing code.
>
>
>
>> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
>> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>>
>>> - Josh
>>>
>>> On 7/3/17 4:15 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>>>> Hi Christopher,
>>>> Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
>>>> happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult
>> the
>>>> graduation guide at [1].
>>>> - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list,
>> not
>>>> private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the
>>>> actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
>>>> - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members
>> since
>>>> incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it
>> looks
>>>> like a diverse group.
>>>> - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was
>> there
>>>> an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
>>>> - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
>>>> other mentors are equally on board.
>>>> John
>>>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
>>>> [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
>>>> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Greetings Incubator,
>>>>>
>>>>> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result
>> of
>>>>> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our
>> private
>>>>> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded
>> it
>>>>> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
>>>>> updated and can be found here[3].
>>>>>
>>>>> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to
>> present
>>>>> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion
>> here
>>>>> and subsequent IPMC vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
>>>>> [2]:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
>>>>> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
>>>>>
>>>>> **********
>>>>> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
>>>>>
>>>>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
>>>>> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to
>> establish
>>>>> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and
>> maintenance
>>>>> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
>>>>> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
>>>>>
>>>>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
>>>>> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
>>>>> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
>>>>>
>>>>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
>>>>> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
>>>>> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
>>>>>
>>>>> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and
>> hereby
>>>>> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
>>>>> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
>>>>> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
>>>>> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
>>>>>
>>>>> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
>>>>> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
>>>>> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
>>>>> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
>>>>> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
>>>>> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
>>>>> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
>>>>> further
>>>>>
>>>>> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
>>>>> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
>>>>> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
>>>>> further
>>>>>
>>>>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
>>>>> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
>>>>> be it further
>>>>>
>>>>> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
>>>>> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
>>>>> discharged.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:52 PM Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> I have some questions:
>
> > On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
> IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
> >
> > The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think
> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see
> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
>
> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within
> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
>
> > My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult
> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're
> building on top of given my view of the world).
> >
> > I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
> that.
> >
> > I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about
> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that
> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their
> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
>
> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within
> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent
> on Accumulo?
>
>
I'd like to answer this number (2): This possibility was mentioned by me
after one of our previous status reports as a discussion I'd like to have
on the list. However, I never raised it again on the list to formally
discuss. There's a few potential reasons why I now think that might not
work well, and why I never brought it up again (and probably why nobody
raised it with the Accumulo PMC):
1. The committers do overlap (all but one Fluo PPMC/committer is also an
Accumulo PMC/committer), but Accumulo's PMC is much larger than Fluo's
PPMC. It would not make sense for the Fluo PPMC to grant majority control
to an Accumulo PMC which does not necessarily share the consensus direction
that Fluo is headed. I'm sure Fluo would be happy to incrementally onboard
Accumulo developers as they began participating in Fluo development, but
bringing them in without vetting their merits from the Fluo team's
perspective seems like a bad idea. The Fluo team would probably prefer
decide on the merits of new committers/PMC based on their contributions to
Fluo, rather than automatically inherit any committers from another project.
2. While Fluo is currently implemented on Accumulo, it is not necessarily
the intent for it to remain this way. Under an Accumulo PMC, it is likely
this coupling would solidify, rather than be abstracted. When Fluo was
proposed to the incubator, it was mentioned that we'd be willing to accept
contributions to expand Fluo's feature set so that it works on other
databases. The proposed TLP resolution reflects this willingness to expand
beyond Accumulo by not mentioning Accumulo in its mission statement.
3. Accumulo uses a JIRA-based workflow with pull requests on GitHub and
C-T-R. Fluo is using GitBox with R-T-C. The workflows are very different.
Accumulo's existing bylaws explicitly contradict Fluo's own workflow that
the developers seem comfortable with.
4. Speaking as an Accumulo PMC member, I don't know that I'd want to set a
precedence for accepting Accumulo-related projects as subprojects of
Accumulo, simply because it can be a bit of scope creep for Accumulo. The
Accumulo PMC has already been approached to accept several other extensions
to Accumulo as subprojects from "drive-by" sources who (from appearances)
simply want to offload the maintenance work without community
participation. I can't speak for the rest of the Accumulo PMC, but it seems
preferable to me that the Accumulo PMC protect itself from such DOA code
dumps by leaning towards resisting subprojects (though, having gone through
Incubation can be proof that the code is not going to be DOA). Speaking as
a Fluo PPMC member, I would not want to burden the Accumulo PMC with the
responsibility to regularly evaluate whether to accept bulk code as
subprojects, by opening those flood gates and distracting the PMC from its
primary responsibilities to its existing code.
> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were
> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> >
> > - Josh
> >
> > On 7/3/17 4:15 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> >> Hi Christopher,
> >> Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
> >> happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult
> the
> >> graduation guide at [1].
> >> - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list,
> not
> >> private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the
> >> actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
> >> - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members
> since
> >> incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it
> looks
> >> like a diverse group.
> >> - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was
> there
> >> an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
> >> - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
> >> other mentors are equally on board.
> >> John
> >> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
> >> [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
> >> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> Greetings Incubator,
> >>>
> >>> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result
> of
> >>> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our
> private
> >>> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded
> it
> >>> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
> >>> updated and can be found here[3].
> >>>
> >>> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to
> present
> >>> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion
> here
> >>> and subsequent IPMC vote.
> >>>
> >>> [1]:
> >>>
> >>>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
> >>> [2]:
> >>>
> >>>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
> >>> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
> >>>
> >>> **********
> >>> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
> >>>
> >>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
> >>> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to
> establish
> >>> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and
> maintenance
> >>> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
> >>> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
> >>>
> >>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
> >>> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
> >>> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
> >>> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
> >>> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and
> hereby
> >>> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
> >>> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
> >>> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
> >>> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
> >>> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
> >>>
> >>> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
> >>> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
> >>> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
> >>> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
> >>> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
> >>> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
> >>> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
> >>> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
> >>>
> >>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
> >>> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
> >>> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
> >>> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
> >>> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
> >>> further
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
> >>> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
> >>> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
> >>> further
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
> >>> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
> >>> be it further
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
> >>> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
> >>> discharged.
> >>>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Josh,
I have some questions:
> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
>
> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
(1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong?
> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're building on top of given my view of the world).
>
> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control, turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid that.
>
> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1.
(2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent on Accumulo?
(3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.)
Regards,
Dave
>
> - Josh
>
> On 7/3/17 4:15 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>> Hi Christopher,
>> Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
>> happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult the
>> graduation guide at [1].
>> - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list, not
>> private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the
>> actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
>> - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members since
>> incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it looks
>> like a diverse group.
>> - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was there
>> an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
>> - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
>> other mentors are equally on board.
>> John
>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
>> [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
>> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Greetings Incubator,
>>>
>>> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result of
>>> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our private
>>> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded it
>>> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
>>> updated and can be found here[3].
>>>
>>> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to present
>>> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion here
>>> and subsequent IPMC vote.
>>>
>>> [1]:
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
>>> [2]:
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
>>> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
>>>
>>> **********
>>> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
>>>
>>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
>>> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
>>> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
>>> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
>>> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
>>>
>>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
>>> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
>>> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
>>>
>>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
>>> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
>>> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
>>>
>>> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and hereby
>>> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
>>> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
>>> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
>>> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
>>>
>>> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
>>> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
>>>
>>> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
>>> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
>>> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
>>> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
>>> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
>>> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
>>> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
>>> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
>>>
>>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
>>> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
>>> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
>>> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
>>> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
>>> further
>>>
>>> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
>>> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
>>> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
>>> further
>>>
>>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
>>> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
>>> be it further
>>>
>>> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
>>> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
>>> discharged.
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some
IPMC discussion. Let me expand:
The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are
self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I
think they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer
and I see none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers.
My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to
graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is
especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a
difficult dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech
they're building on top of given my view of the world).
I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control,
turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid
that.
I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to
approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other
people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions
about what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to
suggest that "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the
core of their project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an
explicit +1.
- Josh
On 7/3/17 4:15 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Hi Christopher,
>
> Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
> happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult the
> graduation guide at [1].
>
> - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list, not
> private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the
> actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
> - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members since
> incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it looks
> like a diverse group.
> - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was there
> an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
> - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
> other mentors are equally on board.
>
> John
>
> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
> [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Greetings Incubator,
>>
>> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result of
>> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our private
>> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded it
>> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
>> updated and can be found here[3].
>>
>> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to present
>> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion here
>> and subsequent IPMC vote.
>>
>> [1]:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
>> [2]:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
>> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
>>
>> **********
>> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
>>
>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
>> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
>> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
>> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
>> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
>>
>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
>> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
>> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
>> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
>> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and hereby
>> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
>> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
>> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
>> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
>> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
>>
>> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
>> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
>> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
>> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
>> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
>> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
>> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
>> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
>>
>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
>> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
>> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
>> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
>> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
>> further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
>> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
>> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
>> further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
>> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
>> be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
>> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
>> discharged.
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:23 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Oh hmm did a bit more digging.
>
> Looks like you did add someone, but I guess due to timing it was missed in
> the last board report? Then nevermind, ignore my 2nd bullet point.
>
>
Correct. This was due to timing. If we don't graduate by then, the new
committer will appear on our next report. (And will appear on our first
board report if we do graduate.) Our podling status page does include him,
however.
> John
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:15 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Christopher,
> >
> > Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
> > happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult
> the
> > graduation guide at [1].
> >
> > - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list,
> > not private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and
> the
> > actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
> > - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members
> since
> > incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it
> looks
> > like a diverse group.
>
It's not as diverse as we'd like. We recognize this and really want to do
better. This was raised in our DISCUSS thread, but it seems agreed that
remaining in Incubation is not going to help this situation much. It will
be something we will continue to work on, regardless, and something we'd
include in our board reports as a TLP.
> > - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was
> > there an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
>
At least three are actively committing. An additional one (myself) helps
out more with code reviews, build system maintenance, bug reports, and
releases rather than coding. At least one of the mentors was active with
reading issues and participating in discussions. Two others have mainly
been acting only as mentors.
I'm not sure I understand your second question.
> > - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
> > other mentors are equally on board.
> >
>
I don't want to speak for them, but to summarize what's in the podling
VOTE/DISCUSS threads: only one formally voted in the VOTE thread, but one
more gave their enthusiastic +1 in the DISCUSS thread. The third expressed
some hesitation based on the size of the community (see my response about
diversity/size above), but seemed to accept the argument I made in that
thread for us continuing to work on this and include our progress in our
regular board reports as a TLP.
> > John
> >
> > [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
> > [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Greetings Incubator,
> >>
> >> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result
> of
> >> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our
> >> private
> >> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded
> it
> >> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
> >> updated and can be found here[3].
> >>
> >> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to
> present
> >> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion
> >> here
> >> and subsequent IPMC vote.
> >>
> >> [1]:
> >>
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
> >> [2]:
> >>
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
> >> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
> >>
> >> **********
> >> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
> >>
> >> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
> >> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
> >> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
> >> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
> >> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
> >>
> >> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
> >> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
> >> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
> >>
> >> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
> >> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
> >> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
> >>
> >> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and hereby
> >> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
> >> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
> >> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
> >> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
> >>
> >> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
> >> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
> >>
> >> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
> >> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
> >> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
> >> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
> >> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
> >> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
> >> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
> >> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
> >>
> >> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
> >> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
> >> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
> >> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
> >> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
> >> further
> >>
> >> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
> >> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
> >> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
> >> further
> >>
> >> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
> >> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
> >> be it further
> >>
> >> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
> >> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
> >> discharged.
> >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Oh hmm did a bit more digging.
Looks like you did add someone, but I guess due to timing it was missed in
the last board report? Then nevermind, ignore my 2nd bullet point.
John
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:15 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Christopher,
>
> Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
> happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult the
> graduation guide at [1].
>
> - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list,
> not private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the
> actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
> - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members since
> incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it looks
> like a diverse group.
> - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was
> there an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
> - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
> other mentors are equally on board.
>
> John
>
> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
> [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Greetings Incubator,
>>
>> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result of
>> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our
>> private
>> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded it
>> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
>> updated and can be found here[3].
>>
>> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to present
>> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion
>> here
>> and subsequent IPMC vote.
>>
>> [1]:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
>> [2]:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
>> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
>>
>> **********
>> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
>>
>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
>> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
>> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
>> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
>> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
>>
>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
>> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
>> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
>> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
>> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and hereby
>> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
>> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
>> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
>> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
>> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
>>
>> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
>> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
>> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
>> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
>> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
>> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
>> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
>> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
>>
>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
>> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
>> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
>> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
>> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
>> further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
>> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
>> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
>> further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
>> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
>> be it further
>>
>> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
>> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
>> discharged.
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fluo graduation as TLP
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Hi Christopher,
Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be
happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult the
graduation guide at [1].
- The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list, not
private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the
actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal.
- I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members since
incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it looks
like a diverse group.
- Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was there
an ask at any point to see who was still interested?
- Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the
other mentors are equally on board.
John
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
[2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> Greetings Incubator,
>
> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result of
> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our private
> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded it
> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been
> updated and can be found here[3].
>
> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to present
> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion here
> and subsequent IPMC vote.
>
> [1]:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E
> [2]:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E
> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo
>
> **********
> Establish the Apache Fluo Project
>
> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets.
>
> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is
> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for
> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and
> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and hereby
> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of
> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to
> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the
> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project:
>
> * Billie Rinaldi <bi...@apache.org>
> * Chris McTague <cj...@apache.org>
> * Christopher Tubbs <ct...@apache.org>
> * Corey J. Nolet <cj...@apache.org>
> * Drew Farris <dr...@apache.org>
> * Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>
> * Keith Turner <kt...@apache.org>
> * Mike Walch <mw...@apache.org>
>
> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed
> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance
> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the
> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal
> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it
> further
>
> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with
> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development
> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it
> further
>
> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the
> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and
> be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
> discharged.
>