You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> on 2007/10/21 07:47:43 UTC
Diversity requirement
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> My feeling is that the Incubator PMC needs to clarify our diversity
> requirements, so waiting a bit is probably a good thing.
"Our" being whom? The ASF as a whole is what I hope the answer is, since otherwise it would be some artificial Incubation requirement, and that wasn't the intent.
Diversity is important for community health. It helps with collaborative decision making, provides more fertile ideas, protects against the fallout from a vendor ceasing its involvement in a project, etc.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wednesday 31 October 2007 16:42, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Another thing that worries me a bit is projects coming in with a large
> (N=more than 3 or 5?) number of committers from the same organization,
> especially people who have no previous Apache or open source committer
> experience.
I agree...
> Do we want to set a limit on N, to give the project more
> chances to reach the necessary diversity?
... but a hard number is probably a bad idea. It depends on so many factors.
The graduation committer list is more important, and since we have not figure
that one out (or have I missed that), I think it is a bit early to talk about
the "incoming list".
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wednesday 31 October 2007 12:30, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I know on Geronimo, and i suspect other projects as well,
> that there have been many times that people that worked for the same
> company voted differently so I don't think its totally pointless but I
> understand the concern.
I would also suspect that voting is less of an issue (at least from
perspective) than "company decides to focus on other things and drops
financial support" kind of issues...
I kind of think that technical merit will succeed most of the time. An
exception to that, that I can think of, might be when existing codebases are
to merge into one. I think we have seen that a couple of times already...
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Oct 30, 2007, at 11:16 PM, Erik Abele wrote:
> Well, usually our voting guidelines require three +1 etc. so for
> example having only three committers from a single company makes
> voting kind of pointless :-)
>
Perhaps. I know on Geronimo, and i suspect other projects as well,
that there have been many times that people that worked for the same
company voted differently so I don't think its totally pointless but I
understand the concern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matthieu Riou <ma...@offthelip.org>.
On Oct 31, 2007 2:45 PM, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Matthieu Riou wrote:
>
> > IMHO 3 legally independent committers can be very hard requirement,
> > especially for small sized project.
>
> How hard is it for users when the company paying them all abandons the
> project, and we don't have enough mass and diversity for it to continue?
> And that is just one effect of insufficient diversity, to to mention the
> benefits of diversity in decision making.
>
Actually this comment was due to my misunderstanding of the "independent
committers" formulation, I thought it meant independent as not working for
any commercial entity instead of not working in the same company. Bill
clarified it and I'm totally fine with that. I'm not arguing against the
benefits of diversity, I just wanted to make sure the incubator could remain
relatively "small project friendly".
Cheers,
Matthieu
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matthieu Riou <ma...@offthelip.org>.
On 10/30/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> Matthieu Riou wrote:
> > On 10/30/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Oct 30, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Matthieu Riou wrote:
> >>
> >>> "there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no
> single
> >>> company or entity that is vital to the success of the project"
> >> What does legally independent mean? Not paid by the same company to
> >> work on a project? I'd be ok with that.
> >
> > My interpretation is not paid by anybody to work on the project. Could
> be
> > the wrong interpretation though, but then the phrasing is maybe not that
> > clear. They should be described as being independent from *each other*.
>
> :) Yes you read too much into it, independent of one another (not
> partners,
> employees etc of the same organization, other than the ASF itself).
Sounds better this way, thanks for clarifying :)
Matthieu
This would /include/ a pending assemblage of people, so if five folks get
> together and plan to launch an incubating project, and kick off a company
> from that together, they do need to ensure they have at least two
> independent
> individuals join that project who aren't one of that group at graduation.
>
> Strange things will happen as projects evolve, of course. That's not the
> incubator's concern once they had graduated. But like you point out,
> folks
> who learn to think and contribute critically to a project will keep doing
> so
> even when they work together at the same company.
>
> We don't know enough about the corporate culture of an existing group of
> folk
> to say they can speak independently of their employer, and honestly, we
> don't
> care as long as there is sufficient diversity on the project in the first
> place.
>
> Bill
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Matthieu Riou wrote:
> On 10/30/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 30, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Matthieu Riou wrote:
>>
>>> "there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single
>>> company or entity that is vital to the success of the project"
>> What does legally independent mean? Not paid by the same company to
>> work on a project? I'd be ok with that.
>
> My interpretation is not paid by anybody to work on the project. Could be
> the wrong interpretation though, but then the phrasing is maybe not that
> clear. They should be described as being independent from *each other*.
:) Yes you read too much into it, independent of one another (not partners,
employees etc of the same organization, other than the ASF itself).
This would /include/ a pending assemblage of people, so if five folks get
together and plan to launch an incubating project, and kick off a company
from that together, they do need to ensure they have at least two independent
individuals join that project who aren't one of that group at graduation.
Strange things will happen as projects evolve, of course. That's not the
incubator's concern once they had graduated. But like you point out, folks
who learn to think and contribute critically to a project will keep doing so
even when they work together at the same company.
We don't know enough about the corporate culture of an existing group of folk
to say they can speak independently of their employer, and honestly, we don't
care as long as there is sufficient diversity on the project in the first place.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matthieu Riou <ma...@offthelip.org>.
On 10/30/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 30, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Matthieu Riou wrote:
>
> > "there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no
> > single
> > company or entity that is vital to the success of the project"
>
> What does legally independent mean? Not paid by the same company to
> work on a project? I'd be ok with that.
My interpretation is not paid by anybody to work on the project. Could be
the wrong interpretation though, but then the phrasing is maybe not that
clear. They should be described as being independent from *each other*.
Matthieu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On 10/31/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 30, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Matthieu Riou wrote:
>
> > "there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no
> > single
> > company or entity that is vital to the success of the project"
>
> What does legally independent mean? Not paid by the same company to
> work on a project? I'd be ok with that.
I thought i had seen a web page with more about what independent meant but
now i can't find anything other than this email from a wiki edit which says:
"The legal definition of independent is long and boring, but basically it
means that there is no binding relationship between the individuals, such as
a shared employer, that is capable of overriding their free will as
individuals, directly or indirectly."
- http://marc.info/?l=incubator-cvs&m=106976845317594&w=2
...ant
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Oct 30, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Matthieu Riou wrote:
> "there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no
> single
> company or entity that is vital to the success of the project"
What does legally independent mean? Not paid by the same company to
work on a project? I'd be ok with that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Diversity requirement
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Matthieu Riou wrote:
> IMHO 3 legally independent committers can be very hard requirement,
> especially for small sized project.
How hard is it for users when the company paying them all abandons the
project, and we don't have enough mass and diversity for it to continue?
And that is just one effect of insufficient diversity, to to mention the
benefits of diversity in decision making.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matthieu Riou <ma...@offthelip.org>.
On 10/30/07, Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> So the absolute minimum should be three committers with at least two
> different entities behind them (e.g. two companies, or at least one
> independent, etc.) - OTOH I think the current rules outlined at [1]
> are perfectly fine.
I'd be fine with that as well but that's not what the policy says [1]:
"there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single
company or entity that is vital to the success of the project"
IMHO 3 legally independent committers can be very hard requirement,
especially for small sized project.
Cheers,
Matthieu
[1]
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>.
On 31.10.2007, at 03:54, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I didn't see a thread get started on this topic yet but I've been
> mulling this over for a bit so perhaps we can continue the
> discussion in this thread?
>
> I'm not sure that there should be a hard requirement for 3, 5 or n
> unique committers. As a guideline I think three is a good working
> number but the more important issue is the Incubator PMC's
> understanding of the community as they've conducted themselves and
> the iPMC's collective view on the project's viability going
> forward....
Well, usually our voting guidelines require three +1 etc. so for
example having only three committers from a single company makes
voting kind of pointless :-)
Or at least it creates the impression for other contributors that the
project is solely led by that company...
So the absolute minimum should be three committers with at least two
different entities behind them (e.g. two companies, or at least one
independent, etc.) - OTOH I think the current rules outlined at [1]
are perfectly fine.
> ...
> Anyway, with my recent changes it caused me to think more about the
> people than a set of requirements. IMO Jim and Noel expressing
> their concern and causing this discussion and deeper inspection of
> the project is the right process and makes a lot of sense.
Absolutely but IMHO we simply need some rules/requirements/guidelines
to set a suitable framework.
Cheers,
Erik
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Thursday 01 November 2007 01:26, Craig L Russell wrote:
> And I certainly wouldn't want to see an arbitrary cutoff of
> prospective Apache committers just because of their affiliation.
Agree, especially if there has been a large set of folks working on the
codebase that is on the way in. So, it comes back to the graduation. Who of
those on the initial committer list have participated "TheApacheWay". Those
who hasn't; Why should they remain committers and PMC members?
And if that sounds reasonable, then the hard nut is "How to determine that?"
Cheers
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi,
On Oct 31, 2007, at 1:42 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Another thing that worries me a bit is projects coming in with a large
> (N=more than 3 or 5?) number of committers from the same organization,
> especially people who have no previous Apache or open source committer
> experience. Do we want to set a limit on N, to give the project more
> chances to reach the necessary diversity?
>
> -Bertrand
From my perspective, having a large number of committers from one
organization with little Apache experience is an opportunity as much
as a potential problem. With one project, we can convert a large
number of folks to "the Apache Way".
I'd caution that such a project might take more conscientious
mentoring than other projects, but there's a large reward.
And I certainly wouldn't want to see an arbitrary cutoff of
prospective Apache committers just because of their affiliation.
Craig
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: Diversity requirement
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On 10/31/07, Paul Fremantle <pz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...I just don't think that placing limits on new committers who are nominated
> by merit during incubation is right....
Totally agreed, committers nominated during incubation are subject to
the normal ASF "filters" so there's no problem with that.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Oct 31, 2007, at 8:38 AM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
> Bertrand
>
> Sorry - I misunderstood your point. I would be very happy to limit the
> number of INITIAL committers! Yes +1.
If it makes sense to do so, then +1. But to do so just to
create a mistaken impression that the podling is, *at this particular
stage*, mostly a 1 company/organization/entity project doesn't
really change things, I think.
> I just don't think that placing limits on new committers who are
> nominated
> by merit during incubation is right.
>
Big +1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Paul Fremantle <pz...@gmail.com>.
Bertrand
Sorry - I misunderstood your point. I would be very happy to limit the
number of INITIAL committers! Yes +1.
I just don't think that placing limits on new committers who are nominated
by merit during incubation is right.
Paul
On 10/31/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 10/31/07, Paul Fremantle <pz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ...if
> > we explicitly try to *limit* participation in a project then we are
> doing
> > two things:
> > 1. Discouraging involvement - the opposite of the aim of the incubator
> > 2. Ruling out meritocracy - making it harder for some people to become
> > committers than others - the opposite of the aim of the ASF....
>
> I tend to agree to your view, but I don't get point 2 above.
>
> Getting committership when a new incubating project comes is makes it
> *very easy* for people to become ASF committers: they basically just
> have to be on the list of initial committers. And they stay there even
> if they do nothing for the project.
>
> By limiting the number of committers from the same organization when a
> project enter incubation, we might force the organization to select
> the best people to drive the project, and others would have to enter
> the normal way, with the project's mentors having their say.
>
> It does make it harder for those people excluded from the initial list
> to enter the project, but not harder than for any other potential
> committer. So I would think that's fair, and that might help community
> diversity in incubating projects, even if that means a longer
> incubation time.
>
> That limit might also be a ratio: if a projects enters incubation with
> 10 committers from the same company and 10 independent existing apache
> committers, fine. But a large non-diverse list of initial committers
> sounds wrong to me.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Paul Fremantle
Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2
OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org
paul@wso2.com
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On 10/31/07, Paul Fremantle <pz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...if
> we explicitly try to *limit* participation in a project then we are doing
> two things:
> 1. Discouraging involvement - the opposite of the aim of the incubator
> 2. Ruling out meritocracy - making it harder for some people to become
> committers than others - the opposite of the aim of the ASF....
I tend to agree to your view, but I don't get point 2 above.
Getting committership when a new incubating project comes is makes it
*very easy* for people to become ASF committers: they basically just
have to be on the list of initial committers. And they stay there even
if they do nothing for the project.
By limiting the number of committers from the same organization when a
project enter incubation, we might force the organization to select
the best people to drive the project, and others would have to enter
the normal way, with the project's mentors having their say.
It does make it harder for those people excluded from the initial list
to enter the project, but not harder than for any other potential
committer. So I would think that's fair, and that might help community
diversity in incubating projects, even if that means a longer
incubation time.
That limit might also be a ratio: if a projects enters incubation with
10 committers from the same company and 10 independent existing apache
committers, fine. But a large non-diverse list of initial committers
sounds wrong to me.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Paul Fremantle <pz...@gmail.com>.
>
> Another thing that worries me a bit is projects coming in with a large
> (N=more than 3 or 5?) number of committers from the same organization,
> especially people who have no previous Apache or open source committer
> experience. Do we want to set a limit on N, to give the project more
> chances to reach the necessary diversity?
To be honest, I think this is not the major issue. I think the major issue
is if CorporateX pulls out of a project, can it survive. Now I admit, if
CorporateX has made 99% of commits, then its going to be hard. However, if
we explicitly try to *limit* participation in a project then we are doing
two things:
1. Discouraging involvement - the opposite of the aim of the incubator
2. Ruling out meritocracy - making it harder for some people to become
committers than others - the opposite of the aim of the ASF.
I think it is vital that we treat this issue with a wide perspective.
Paul
--
Paul Fremantle
Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2
OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org
paul@wso2.com
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On 10/31/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> ...the more important issue is the Incubator PMC's
> understanding of the community as they've conducted themselves and the
> iPMC's collective view on the project's viability going forward....
Agreed, but currently as an IPMC member I have a hard time keeping up
with all projects.
So I think this comes back, as already suggested, to having some form
of mentors "report on community diversity" when the time comes to
graduate. The mentors are in the best position to get a feel for the
actual diversity, based on the indicators defined in [1], which I
agree is basically fine.
Another thing that worries me a bit is projects coming in with a large
(N=more than 3 or 5?) number of committers from the same organization,
especially people who have no previous Apache or open source committer
experience. Do we want to set a limit on N, to give the project more
chances to reach the necessary diversity?
-Bertrand
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
I didn't see a thread get started on this topic yet but I've been
mulling this over for a bit so perhaps we can continue the discussion
in this thread?
I'm not sure that there should be a hard requirement for 3, 5 or n
unique committers. As a guideline I think three is a good working
number but the more important issue is the Incubator PMC's
understanding of the community as they've conducted themselves and the
iPMC's collective view on the project's viability going forward. This
is an ASF wide issue but the Incubator is the gateway for healthy
communities to be brought into the ASF so my context for this
discussion is the Incubator.
The reason I make this comment is I recently changed roles at my
company and will be investing less time in Geronimo than I was
previously. This doesn't change my desire to participate and work on
the project, it changes the amount of time I have to participate :)
For the record, I work for IBM but have no stake in Tuscany one way or
the other from an IBM perspective (heh, my new role is playing with
hardware and virtualization technology) and generally I tend to be
more critical of IBM heavy projects so I can do my best to have a
balanced view (perhaps even leaning a little against IBM).
With this recent change in my role it occurred to me that my
affiliation with the Geronimo is more about my personal interest in
the project as opposed to it being part of a job requirement.
Certainly not all committers are in that same position so we can't
simply assume that everyone's interest in a project is a personal
passion either. The point being that our confidence in a project
should be based on the individuals and their behaviours rather than a
hard and fast affiliation requirement; which does change over time.
As far as Tuscany is concerned, the community has been chugging for
quite some time and it appears that they are not losing steam (sure
they can later, but so can every project when its goals are met).
They've weathered some challenging storms (a fork of the code base and
community normalization issues) and yet despite the challenges they
are still making progress. I think they are in pretty good shape and
I respect the opinion of the mentors which seem to indicate they are
satisfied as well.
My point is that we have sufficient evidence that the community
conducts itself well, can weather the storms and has a growing base of
interest. I think once they complete their resolution text (and with
their new committers ta boot) they should probably bring their vote
forward again.
Anyway, with my recent changes it caused me to think more about the
people than a set of requirements. IMO Jim and Noel expressing their
concern and causing this discussion and deeper inspection of the
project is the right process and makes a lot of sense.
Just my $0.02
On Oct 23, 2007, at 2:22 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Agred, community diversity is an ASF-wide issue, not only an
> Incubator concern.
>
> But, as there have been some constructive discussions about it here
> recently, we might want to get the ball rolling by submitting some
> concrete ideas to the ASF membership?
>
> If we agree on that, I'll start a thread here to discuss a set of
> guidelines about how we define and handle diversity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Diversity requirement
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On 10/21/07, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> > My feeling is that the Incubator PMC needs to clarify our diversity
> > requirements, so waiting a bit is probably a good thing.
>
> "Our" being whom? The ASF as a whole is what I hope the answer is, since otherwise
> it would be some artificial Incubation requirement, and that wasn't the intent....
Agred, community diversity is an ASF-wide issue, not only an Incubator concern.
But, as there have been some constructive discussions about it here
recently, we might want to get the ball rolling by submitting some
concrete ideas to the ASF membership?
If we agree on that, I'll start a thread here to discuss a set of
guidelines about how we define and handle diversity.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org