You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stanbol.apache.org by Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> on 2011/06/30 14:40:49 UTC
Apache Stanbol Documentation
Dear colleages,
I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
existing material.
The index page [1] shows the installation process and should provide
links to concrete usage scenarios, such as content enhancement (should
describe user process) as well as to the technical documentation of each
component/service (should describe REST API, technical features,
configuration etc.)
To avoid double work, we should define the "border" between the
Documentation and various Readme files and/or think of links between
such content. So I am not sure, whether to better describe each engine
in detail in the documentation or in the Readme.file directly in the
sourcecode?
The pages are still in staging mode but should be online and running
Tue, 07/07 in Paris latest.
An additional features page could hold the main features at a glance. [2]
Best,
Andreas
[1] http://stanbol.staging.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/
[2] http://stanbol.staging.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/features
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 3, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Fabian Christ wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2011/7/3 Olivier Grisel <ol...@ensta.org>:
>> 2011/6/30 Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org>:
>>> Dear colleages,
>>>
>>> I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
>>> existing material.
>>>
>>> The index page [1] shows the installation process and should provide links
>>> to concrete usage scenarios, such as content enhancement (should describe
>>> user process) as well as to the technical documentation of each
>>> component/service (should describe REST API, technical features,
>>> configuration etc.)
>>>
>>> To avoid double work, we should define the "border" between the
>>> Documentation and various Readme files and/or think of links between such
>>> content. So I am not sure, whether to better describe each engine in detail
>>> in the documentation or in the Readme.file directly in the sourcecode?
>>
>> I am +1 for putting most of the documentation on the website and only
>> basic build / configuration / launch instructions + pointer to the
>> website in the README files, where applicable (especially the top
>> level).
>
> Yes, that sounds reasonable.
Yes, but is it "the Apache Way" ?
Just kidding :)
+1. (That's the Nuxeo Way by the way.)
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Fabian Christ <ch...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
2011/7/3 Olivier Grisel <ol...@ensta.org>:
> 2011/6/30 Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org>:
>> Dear colleages,
>>
>> I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
>> existing material.
>>
>> The index page [1] shows the installation process and should provide links
>> to concrete usage scenarios, such as content enhancement (should describe
>> user process) as well as to the technical documentation of each
>> component/service (should describe REST API, technical features,
>> configuration etc.)
>>
>> To avoid double work, we should define the "border" between the
>> Documentation and various Readme files and/or think of links between such
>> content. So I am not sure, whether to better describe each engine in detail
>> in the documentation or in the Readme.file directly in the sourcecode?
>
> I am +1 for putting most of the documentation on the website and only
> basic build / configuration / launch instructions + pointer to the
> website in the README files, where applicable (especially the top
> level).
Yes, that sounds reasonable.
+1
--
Fabian
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Olivier Grisel <ol...@ensta.org>.
2011/6/30 Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org>:
> Dear colleages,
>
> I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
> existing material.
>
> The index page [1] shows the installation process and should provide links
> to concrete usage scenarios, such as content enhancement (should describe
> user process) as well as to the technical documentation of each
> component/service (should describe REST API, technical features,
> configuration etc.)
>
> To avoid double work, we should define the "border" between the
> Documentation and various Readme files and/or think of links between such
> content. So I am not sure, whether to better describe each engine in detail
> in the documentation or in the Readme.file directly in the sourcecode?
I am +1 for putting most of the documentation on the website and only
basic build / configuration / launch instructions + pointer to the
website in the README files, where applicable (especially the top
level).
> The pages are still in staging mode but should be online and running Tue,
Ok, tell me if you need help for the publication process.
--
Olivier
http://twitter.com/ogrisel - http://github.com/ogrisel
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Andreas Gruber <an...@salzburgresearch.at>.
I'll combine your suggestions:
The Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the European R&D project IKS
- Interactive Knowledge Stack[1].
Some people who are working on the project are part-funded by IKS
project, as well as by several European SME CMS providers, who are
adopting [2] the Apache Stanbol.
[1] http://www.iks-project.eu/
[2] http://wiki.iks-project.eu/index.php/Participants
Better?
Andreas
Stefane Fermigier schrieb:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
>>> existing material....
>> Cool, thanks for this!
>>
>> I briefly reviewed, one comment about [1]:
>>
>> "Apache Stanbol project was initiated and is part-funded by the
>> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack for small to
>> medium CMS providers."
>>
>> Apache projects are not funded by external entities,
>
> This particular one, at least (and probably most of the others) are. Or are you implying everyone is working on these projects for free ?
>
>> I suggest
>> changing this to just "the Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the
>> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack" with the link.
>
> How about: "Some people who are working on the Apache Stanbol project are funded by European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack, as well as several european SME [list the SMEs]" ?
>
> S.
>
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>>> [1] http://stanbol.staging.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/
>
--
Andreas Gruber
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Jakob-Haringer Strasse 5/III
5020 Salzburg, Austria
phone +43 (0)662 2288 244
skype callto://andreas_gruber/
http://www.salzburgresearch.at
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 12:12, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>>> ...I'm discussing this in the context of the Stanbol and IKS projects, not in an abstract way....
>>>
>>> If you want to discuss those things here as opposed to at
>>> general@incubator.apache.org, best might be for you to start specific
>>> new threads on each topic (nofollow attribute, companies funding
>>> projects etc) to keep those discussions focused.
>>
>> Not sure we need three threads. There are basically 3 short questions:
>>
>> Question 1: do you admit that Stanbol is funded in part (to the amount of EUR 10M) by the EU and some specific companies and organizations?
>>
>> My answer: +1
>
> -1
>
> Some developers
*Most* developers
> who happen
Why "who happen" ? Why make it like a coincidence ?
We don't "happen" to be working, we're working for a reason, because we have a contract with the EU.
> to work on Stanbol are funded by an EU
> project.
And by the companies who are members of this project.
I'm starting to wonder why you keep forgetting this simple fact.
> The Stanbol project itself is not funded by anyone.
Of course it is. You're just playing with words. Ask the EU, ask the IKS board, ask the developers.
>
>> Question 2: are you a "volunteer" on this project ?
>>
>> My answer: I'm not. I'm paid to work on this project.
>
> I am a volunteer.
I'm speaking about people who are contributing to the project (code base).
> I get paid for my time, but I choose, of my own free will to volunteer
> here in order to satisfy the needs of my employer.
1. You seem to be your own employer (with another partner), so you're once again playing with words.
2. IKS project members (hence the majority of the contributors to Stanbol at this point) are working on the project because they have a work contract with a company (or organization) that has a contract with the EU (or indirectly with Salzburg Research).
> Your definition of yourself as a volunteer is based entirely on the
> fact that you are paid. this is a very narrow view of what a volunteer
> is. For example Wikipedia says "people also volunteer for their own
> skill development, to meet others, to make contacts for possible
> employment, to have fun, and a variety of other reasons that could be
> considered self-serving."
Given the current market condition for software developers, no one can be forced to work on Stanbol if they didn't want to, and those who do work on Stanbol probably have a lot of fun doing so.
By your definition, as soon as someone's having fun doing some work, they are a volunteer and money is out of the equation ? Bullshit. This is an orthogonal concept.
But given that you originally claimed "we ignore money, everyone's a volunteer", in this context, I'm reminding you of the huge amount of money that is involved in this project, and that most people working on this project are paid to do so.
> That pretty much captures the reasons I am here as a volunteer.
>
>> Question 3: Do you want rel="nofollow" attributes on links pointing to your company website in the credits page?
>
> No
>
> It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links.
Standard by written nowhere, as far as I can tell (and Google).
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 12:12, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>> ...I'm discussing this in the context of the Stanbol and IKS projects, not in an abstract way....
>>
>> If you want to discuss those things here as opposed to at
>> general@incubator.apache.org, best might be for you to start specific
>> new threads on each topic (nofollow attribute, companies funding
>> projects etc) to keep those discussions focused.
>
> Not sure we need three threads. There are basically 3 short questions:
>
> Question 1: do you admit that Stanbol is funded in part (to the amount of EUR 10M) by the EU and some specific companies and organizations?
>
> My answer: +1
-1
Some developers who happen to work on Stanbol are funded by an EU
project. The Stanbol project itself is not funded by anyone.
> Question 2: are you a "volunteer" on this project ?
>
> My answer: I'm not. I'm paid to work on this project.
I am a volunteer.
I get paid for my time, but I choose, of my own free will to volunteer
here in order to satisfy the needs of my employer. I find that this is
the most efficient use of my time and therefore I provide maximum
benefit for my employer by working on this project. If, at any time I
believe that working here is not the most efficient use of my time I
will simply suggest to my employer that I walk away from the project.
At that point my employer may choose to insist I stay. Even in those
circumstances I would be a volunteer here because whilst my employer
can tell me what to do with my time nobody here can.
Your definition of yourself as a volunteer is based entirely on the
fact that you are paid. this is a very narrow view of what a volunteer
is. For example Wikipedia says "people also volunteer for their own
skill development, to meet others, to make contacts for possible
employment, to have fun, and a variety of other reasons that could be
considered self-serving."
That pretty much captures the reasons I am here as a volunteer.
> Question 3: Do you want rel="nofollow" attributes on links pointing to your company website in the credits page?
No
It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links.
As an IIPMC member I will not go against that practice without a wider
discussion to inform my opinion. My opinion, at this point, is based
on over 10 years of experience here at the ASF. My opinion today is
different to my opinion 10 years ago.
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>> ...I'm discussing this in the context of the Stanbol and IKS projects, not in an abstract way....
>
> If you want to discuss those things here as opposed to at
> general@incubator.apache.org, best might be for you to start specific
> new threads on each topic (nofollow attribute, companies funding
> projects etc) to keep those discussions focused.
Not sure we need three threads. There are basically 3 short questions:
Question 1: do you admit that Stanbol is funded in part (to the amount of EUR 10M) by the EU and some specific companies and organizations?
My answer: +1
Question 2: are you a "volunteer" on this project ?
My answer: I'm not. I'm paid to work on this project.
Question 3: Do you want rel="nofollow" attributes on links pointing to your company website in the credits page?
My answer: no.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> ...I'm discussing this in the context of the Stanbol and IKS projects, not in an abstract way....
If you want to discuss those things here as opposed to at
general@incubator.apache.org, best might be for you to start specific
new threads on each topic (nofollow attribute, companies funding
projects etc) to keep those discussions focused.
I might not reply before Monday, mostly offline until then.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 14:26, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> c) In the proposal document, which you presumably helped draw up,
>>> there is a section on "Known Risks". One of the sub-sections is "An
>>> Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand". In this section the
>>> Stanbol proposal says "The brand is not what makes the difference for
>>> the IKS team, the motivation is the opportunity to build and grow a
>>> community." If the brand is not important then a "nofollow" link is
>>> not an issue, you are free to write anything you like that conforms to
>>> the trademark rules, on your own website.
>>
>> We're not talking about the Apache Brand here. We're talking about PageRank. Completely different thing.
>
> What do you think makes a link from the ASF site valuable?
PageRank and branding, but when debating about rel=nofollow, we're talking about PageRank, not branding.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 14:26, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
...
>> c) In the proposal document, which you presumably helped draw up,
>> there is a section on "Known Risks". One of the sub-sections is "An
>> Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand". In this section the
>> Stanbol proposal says "The brand is not what makes the difference for
>> the IKS team, the motivation is the opportunity to build and grow a
>> community." If the brand is not important then a "nofollow" link is
>> not an issue, you are free to write anything you like that conforms to
>> the trademark rules, on your own website.
>
> We're not talking about the Apache Brand here. We're talking about PageRank. Completely different thing.
What do you think makes a link from the ASF site valuable?
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:39 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 11:38, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:20 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>
>>>>> ... One way of crediting employers without
>>>>> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
>>>>> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
>>>>> links)
>>>>
>>>> Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
>>>
>>> The nofollow attribute you mean? I absolutely agree with Ross here,
>>> and as an Incubator PMC member I will not allow links to companies on
>>> the Stanbol website unless they have a nofollow attribute.
>>
>> Is this a rule or just an arbitrary decision ? Why didn't you mention it when advocating moving the project to Apache ?
>
> As we've tried to communicate, it a rule with solid reasoning behind
> it.
With "solid" cargo-cult reasoning, as per my previous response.
And it's not a rule since it's not documented.
> Even ASF sponsors don't get a follow link.
That's a different issue.
> As for it being mentioned during the discussions about moving to the
> ASF I was not involved, but I will observe that:
>
> a) this is well documented across the ASF, it's lists and it's press
> releases your Champion cannot be expected to anticipate every possible
> issue that might come up. Partners are expected to do their own due
> diligence
Once again, where is this supposed "rule" documented ?
> b) there was a period of discussion during the proposal phase in which
> these issues could have been raised by anyone on the project (I don't
> expect anyone to think of all possible issues in advance though - it's
> just I find the accusatory tone of the above sentence quite offensive,
> even though it is not aimed at me)
Once again, where is this supposed "rule" documented ?
> c) In the proposal document, which you presumably helped draw up,
> there is a section on "Known Risks". One of the sub-sections is "An
> Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand". In this section the
> Stanbol proposal says "The brand is not what makes the difference for
> the IKS team, the motivation is the opportunity to build and grow a
> community." If the brand is not important then a "nofollow" link is
> not an issue, you are free to write anything you like that conforms to
> the trademark rules, on your own website.
We're not talking about the Apache Brand here. We're talking about PageRank. Completely different thing.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 11:38, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:20 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>>>> ... One way of crediting employers without
>>>> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
>>>> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
>>>> links)
>>>
>>> Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
>>
>> The nofollow attribute you mean? I absolutely agree with Ross here,
>> and as an Incubator PMC member I will not allow links to companies on
>> the Stanbol website unless they have a nofollow attribute.
>
> Is this a rule or just an arbitrary decision ? Why didn't you mention it when advocating moving the project to Apache ?
As we've tried to communicate, it a rule with solid reasoning behind
it. Even ASF sponsors don't get a follow link.
As for it being mentioned during the discussions about moving to the
ASF I was not involved, but I will observe that:
a) this is well documented across the ASF, it's lists and it's press
releases your Champion cannot be expected to anticipate every possible
issue that might come up. Partners are expected to do their own due
diligence
b) there was a period of discussion during the proposal phase in which
these issues could have been raised by anyone on the project (I don't
expect anyone to think of all possible issues in advance though - it's
just I find the accusatory tone of the above sentence quite offensive,
even though it is not aimed at me)
c) In the proposal document, which you presumably helped draw up,
there is a section on "Known Risks". One of the sub-sections is "An
Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand". In this section the
Stanbol proposal says "The brand is not what makes the difference for
the IKS team, the motivation is the opportunity to build and grow a
community." If the brand is not important then a "nofollow" link is
not an issue, you are free to write anything you like that conforms to
the trademark rules, on your own website.
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:20 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>>> ... One way of crediting employers without
>>> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
>>> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
>>> links)
>>
>> Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
>
> The nofollow attribute you mean? I absolutely agree with Ross here,
> and as an Incubator PMC member I will not allow links to companies on
> the Stanbol website unless they have a nofollow attribute.
Is this a rule or just an arbitrary decision ? Why didn't you mention it when advocating moving the project to Apache ?
> If you think this is wrong, please discuss it on general@incubator.apache.org.
No. I'm discussing it here.
>>> . This means the moment you vote someone in their employer gets
>>> credit. Another way (which is my preference) is you have a page
>>> listing *users* of the product (with nofollow links). This means
>>> everyone can submit a patch and have their employer listed.
>>
>> Come on. The EU is giving 6 MEUR to this project. Nuxeo is giving 50 KEUR. There is clearly a hierarchy.
>
> There might be a hierarchy in the IKS project but the ASF does not
> care about it:
I don't care that the ASF doesn't care, because this is the reality that you and Ross (hence, the ASF?) have been denying several times by claiming "projects are not funded by companies" when they clearly are.
> the hierachy in Stanbol is ASF board -> Incubator PMC
> -> Stanbol PPMC -> Stanbol committers. Nothing else.
>
>>> ...The ASF does not single out individual companies. If its not enough to
>>> get a load of free volunteer time on the software they want to use
>>> then they can do public speaking, they can publicly praise their
>>> Apache committers. They can be *seen* to engage with the project both
>>> here and at public events, like ApacheCon.
>>
>> I don't care about the ASF. I'm not even a member....
>
> <almost-tongue-in-cheek-now>
> If you don't care about the ASF feel free to leave Stanbol at any time.
Yeah right. Except that we (Nuxeo) have a contract with the European Union until 2012 that prevents us to do so. So I won't, at least until the end of 2012 ;)
> </almost-tongue-in-cheek-now>
>
> If you want Stanbol to graduate as an ASF project there are strict
> rules and best practices in place, that aim to avoid undue company
> interference with our projects, and fair credit to all involved.
Another "newspeak" exercise from you: calling the fact that several companies (and other organizations) are pouring huge amounts of money into this project "interference".
It's not interference. It's working on the project as contractually obligated by the EU, and expecting some results in return.
And regarding credits, yes I expect everyone given credit, as long at there is no "nofollow" on the links to our respective websites.
> If you don't like those rules, as I said the best place to start
> discussing them is at general@incubator.apache.org.
As I said, no. I'm discussing this in the context of the Stanbol and IKS projects, not in an abstract way.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>... One way of crediting employers without
>> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
>> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
>> links)
>
> Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
The nofollow attribute you mean? I absolutely agree with Ross here,
and as an Incubator PMC member I will not allow links to companies on
the Stanbol website unless they have a nofollow attribute.
If you think this is wrong, please discuss it on general@incubator.apache.org.
>
>> . This means the moment you vote someone in their employer gets
>> credit. Another way (which is my preference) is you have a page
>> listing *users* of the product (with nofollow links). This means
>> everyone can submit a patch and have their employer listed.
>
> Come on. The EU is giving 6 MEUR to this project. Nuxeo is giving 50 KEUR. There is clearly a hierarchy.
There might be a hierarchy in the IKS project but the ASF does not
care about it: the hierachy in Stanbol is ASF board -> Incubator PMC
-> Stanbol PPMC -> Stanbol committers. Nothing else.
>> ...The ASF does not single out individual companies. If its not enough to
>> get a load of free volunteer time on the software they want to use
>> then they can do public speaking, they can publicly praise their
>> Apache committers. They can be *seen* to engage with the project both
>> here and at public events, like ApacheCon.
>
> I don't care about the ASF. I'm not even a member....
<almost-tongue-in-cheek-now>
If you don't care about the ASF feel free to leave Stanbol at any time.
</almost-tongue-in-cheek-now>
If you want Stanbol to graduate as an ASF project there are strict
rules and best practices in place, that aim to avoid undue company
interference with our projects, and fair credit to all involved.
If you don't like those rules, as I said the best place to start
discussing them is at general@incubator.apache.org.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 8:05 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>> Why are you so much better than everyone else around here? (rhetorical question)
>>>
>>> Obviously I'm not since, as Bertrand stated, I'm only a PPMC (whatever that means) and PPMCs are 2 steps down the food chain below board members.
>>
>> There is no food chain. Bertrands position on the board is irrelevant here in this community.
>
> Well, he's the one who brought it in the discussion, not me, so I was assuming he meant that Board members had more power than foot soldiers...
That's not what I meant when I said the ASF board is at the top of
this project's operational hierarchy - I was referring to the board of
directors as a whole, not to individual directors. As Ross said, me
(currently) being a director doesn't give me more power in this
project than anyone else.
As we have repeatedly said, you're welcome to bring your concerns to
general@incubator.a.o if you disagree with us as mentors, and you
might be surprised at how welcome your voice would be there.
Sorry if I was unclear, I didn't mean to dismiss your opinion as that
of a foot soldier - every opinion is welcome if expressed in a
respectful way.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:58 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:11 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>
>>> This is not Eclipse or OW2, this is the ASF. We have a mission of
>>> producing software for the public good, that is a different mission to
>>> other organisations and thus the approach is different. What people
>>> have learned elsewhere are not necessarily going to work here.
>>
>> Indeed, so you talking about "best practices" were mostly a trick to pass your opinion as a general rule...
>
> Stefane, I've had enough of you constantly implying that Ross and
> myself are being dishonest and trying to play games here.
Sorry about this sentence, I should have expressed more clearly my thought, but let's call it a day.
Cheers,
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:11 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>> This is not Eclipse or OW2, this is the ASF. We have a mission of
>> producing software for the public good, that is a different mission to
>> other organisations and thus the approach is different. What people
>> have learned elsewhere are not necessarily going to work here.
>
> Indeed, so you talking about "best practices" were mostly a trick to pass your opinion as a general rule...
Stefane, I've had enough of you constantly implying that Ross and
myself are being dishonest and trying to play games here.
I'll give you the benefit of doubt and assume you're having a bad day,
as usually our discussions have been much more constructive.
For now, I'm out of this discussion.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:11 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> This is not Eclipse or OW2, this is the ASF. We have a mission of
> producing software for the public good, that is a different mission to
> other organisations and thus the approach is different. What people
> have learned elsewhere are not necessarily going to work here.
Indeed, so you talking about "best practices" were mostly a trick to pass your opinion as a general rule.
> If the community does not believe that the mentors are taking you in
> the right direction then seek advice from the IPMC, that's what they
> are there for.
>
> There seems to be a confusion about what is/is not being stated here.
> There are three questions that I can see:
>
> 1) are ASF contributors are volunteers in the eyes of the project
> 2) how does Stanbol give credit to companies who pay the salaries of
> those volunteers
> 3) does Stanbol allow links without nofollow
>
> Let me state my own opinion on each of these (I stress the word
> opinion here, although some of my words and those of Bertrands have
> been taken as instruction or direction. This is not our intention
> unless we state explicitly that an item is non-negotiable). Decision
> making in the ASF is a consensus building approach. To build consensus
> we listen to the opinions of those who wish to state one and then make
> our decisions.
>
> So on each of the above questions:
>
> 1) It is fundamental to The Apache way that everyone is an individual.
Once again, you're playing with words.
"Individual" doesn't equate with "volunteer".
Then who do you mean "everyone" ?
> This part *is* written in stone. See, for example, "Individuals
> compose the ASF" on http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
From this document "create an independent legal entity to which companies and individuals can donate resources and be assured that those resources will be used for the public benefit"
-> So now companies *can* donate resources to the ASF after all ? I thought that "employers do not fund the project." (quoting you from your July 1, 2011 11:43:58 AM GMT+02:00 message).
> or th About the ASF in any press release which starts "Established in
> 1999, the all-volunteer Foundation oversees..." e.g.
> https://blogs.apache.org/conferences/entry/apachecon_2011_announces_open_source
Also wrong, according to Bertrand, the ASF has a certain numbers of employees (3 if I'm not mistaken).
> 2) Stanbol can give credit to companies and others who employ or
> otherwise pay for volunteer time here.
No no no. Not everyone is a volunteer. Companies (and the EC) pay for some people who work on the project, who are employees of these companies. They are not "volunteers".
> 3) I feel that nofollow is an important part of best practice here in
> the ASF. A link from an Apache site is of considerable value and
> therefore carefully managed.
As I wrote a few minutes ago, no, it's not of "considerable value". A link from the home page of the Apache would be of "tremendous value" (PR = 9), a link from the sponsors page of "considerable value" (PR = 8), a link from the credit page of a given Apache project of "noticeable" value.
> It is possible that this is not formal policy,
Then don't claim it's a rule. It's not.
> it might be that this is a case of a practice that has become
> so prevalent that nobody has ever made it formal policy. I've simply
> never needed to find out whether it is even allowed. The projects I'm
> involved with have always decided to require nofollow. The key
> arguments I hear ime and again are a) sponsors are not allowed follow
> links
Yes they are, above the bronze level, as was stated several times now. So stop writing things that are obviously wrong.
> b) a link from an ASF site is valuable and, as a charity
> producing software for the public good, we cannot benefit one
> company/member/committer/group/individual more than any other
So ? Did I ask for anything like this ?
> c) a
> link from the ASF is valuable and giving them to one "class" of
> contributor but not another creates unnecessary community tension.
Did I ask for this ?
> Each of these arguments can be read about in the various mailing list
> discussions I linked to
You didn't. You linked to search engine results, that didn't seem relevant to the discussion upon first inspection.
And again, a mailing list discussion is not a policy unless there has been a formal decision to make it into one.
> The Stanbol project community makes its own decisions on most things.
Indeed, though that's not what you have been implying time and time again in your various messages (first, by saying that there are "best practices" that have to be followed, then by saying that the decision belongs to another mailing list).
> There are a few items that are foundational policy (such as everyone
> is represents themselves not their employer, see
> http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html, and the legal
> due diligence process on code and releases, see
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html). Here in the Incubator we
> provide mentors to advise the community on how to best become a
> sustainable Apache project.
>
> So, moving forwards, the community needs to decide what it wants to
> do. is one of the solutions mentioned in 2) above satisfactory? If so
> is the community satisfied with the advice of its mentors that
> nofollow is a bad idea?
Unsubstantiated advice, I may add.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
I'm not going to reply to every point, many of your comments are
putting words in my mouth, this is not productive. Instead I've
removed all history of this conversation and instead tried to address
the issues you raise with short concise statements. I hope this will
serve as a summary of my advice as a mentor and will allow the
community to come to a consensus.
This is not Eclipse or OW2, this is the ASF. We have a mission of
producing software for the public good, that is a different mission to
other organisations and thus the approach is different. What people
have learned elsewhere are not necessarily going to work here.
If the community does not believe that the mentors are taking you in
the right direction then seek advice from the IPMC, that's what they
are there for.
There seems to be a confusion about what is/is not being stated here.
There are three questions that I can see:
1) are ASF contributors are volunteers in the eyes of the project
2) how does Stanbol give credit to companies who pay the salaries of
those volunteers
3) does Stanbol allow links without nofollow
Let me state my own opinion on each of these (I stress the word
opinion here, although some of my words and those of Bertrands have
been taken as instruction or direction. This is not our intention
unless we state explicitly that an item is non-negotiable). Decision
making in the ASF is a consensus building approach. To build consensus
we listen to the opinions of those who wish to state one and then make
our decisions.
So on each of the above questions:
1) It is fundamental to The Apache way that everyone is an individual.
This part *is* written in stone. See, for example, "Individuals
compose the ASF" on http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
or th About the ASF in any press release which starts "Established in
1999, the all-volunteer Foundation oversees..." e.g.
https://blogs.apache.org/conferences/entry/apachecon_2011_announces_open_source
2) Stanbol can give credit to companies and others who employ or
otherwise pay for volunteer time here. How this is handled needs to be
planned out carefully. Earlier in this thread a suggestion was made by
Andreas that pulled together a few ideas from this list. That seemed
sensible to me. I made a couple of suggestions and Bertand also
pointed to an alternative approach which is acceptable. Another
example is the approach taken by Apache Wookie (incubating) which came
from an EC project (see the foot of
http://incubator.apache.org/wookie/)
3) I feel that nofollow is an important part of best practice here in
the ASF. A link from an Apache site is of considerable value and
therefore carefully managed. It is possible that this is not formal
policy, it might be that this is a case of a practice that has become
so prevalent that nobody has ever made it formal policy. I've simply
never needed to find out whether it is even allowed. The projects I'm
involved with have always decided to require nofollow. The key
arguments I hear ime and again are a) sponsors are not allowed follow
links b) a link from an ASF site is valuable and, as a charity
producing software for the public good, we cannot benefit one
company/member/committer/group/individual more than any other c) a
link from the ASF is valuable and giving them to one "class" of
contributor but not another creates unnecessary community tension.
Each of these arguments can be read about in the various mailing list
discussions I linked to
The Stanbol project community makes its own decisions on most things.
There are a few items that are foundational policy (such as everyone
is represents themselves not their employer, see
http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html, and the legal
due diligence process on code and releases, see
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html). Here in the Incubator we
provide mentors to advise the community on how to best become a
sustainable Apache project.
So, moving forwards, the community needs to decide what it wants to
do. is one of the solutions mentioned in 2) above satisfactory? If so
is the community satisfied with the advice of its mentors that
nofollow is a bad idea?
At this point I intend to step back and allow the community to make a
decision based on the ***advice*** of your mentors.
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 8:05 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)
>
> On 1 Jul 2011, at 18:13, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>>> On 1 July 2011 13:54, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think your time spent arguing with false (cargo-cult) logic or bogus information (see below - the various links you give to support your position are bogus) is not only worthless, but counterproductive.
>
> As a mentor it is my job to e sure that the project learns best practice in the ASF.
1. There is a difference between "best practice" and "mandatory practice". You seem to imply that the former implies the later, but that is not true. And for me the later implies that there is a written rule somewhere, which is not the case.
2. What you seem to consider a best practice in the ASF is not a best practice in other organization we are member of (Eclipse Foundation or OW2). So this is a really relative notion.
3. The logic behind your assertion ("all projects at Apache that are successful follow this practice, hence you have to follow this practice to be successful") is wrong for at least two reasons:
a. This is a basic sophism (all A's are B's doesn't imply that to be A you have to be B)
b. There are successful projects outside Apache who don't follow the practice.
> Two mentors have mad the same assertions.
Two opinions don't make a fact.
> You can close not to accept out opinion, we are mentors.
I'm very open to others opinions. I'm not open to opinions that are presented as facts. And the fact that I'm open to others opinions doesn't imply that I necessarily agree with them.
> However you cannot refuse to listen and claim we are wasting time. I find this offensive and disrespectful.
As I wrote, besides the pure logical fallacy of your reasoning, you've said that "Partners are expected to do their own due diligence" (BTW: what do you mean by "partners"? I thought there were only individuals, not companies, for the ASF?), but when I asked you to send links to the information we were supposed to find as part of our due diligence, you send only irrelevant links.
I personally find offensive and disrespectful that you refuse to acknowledge the 10 MEUR investment on this project by the EC and the partners by claiming that "all contributors are volunteers" (we're not - we have a contractual obligation to work on this project), and the
> We have told you how and where you can escalate this if you think we are not accurately representing the view of the ASF as a whole.
This is not the question I'm asking. The question is not wether the ASF has a *view*, it's wether it has a (documented) *policy*.
> You have refused to do so, instead accusing us of wasting your time.
Indeed. I don't care about the ASF's view as long as it has no impact on my life (well, I care about it, but not enough to take the time to try to change it).
> Take it to the general list. If you are able to gather sufficient consensus for your position then you with find both Bertrand and I will back down.
Obviously the chances of me changing the opinion of a mailing list which is largely outside our group is very weak. I prefer to swipe by own doorstep and so I have no interest in pursuing this endeavor.
>>> To get there you need to adopt the successful model developed here at
>>> the ASF and engaged with by many companies that have a considerably
>>> higher investment in ASF projects than you do. The model works. It's
>>> not perfect and it sometimes evolves. If you ant to try and have this
>>> specific part of it evolve then take it to the wider community.
>>
>> Nope. That's not my job nor my priority.
>
> It's your job to make Stanbol a success.
Indeed. Nothing more, and specially not change the ASF's view on the nofollow link policy.
> Here in the ASF that means more than writing code. It means making the project sustainable through our tried and tested development model. You have mentors to help guide you so that if you choose to focus only on code you can do so.
Guiding is not commanding.
>>> Why are you so much better than everyone else around here? (rhetorical question)
>>
>> Obviously I'm not since, as Bertrand stated, I'm only a PPMC (whatever that means) and PPMCs are 2 steps down the food chain below board members.
>
> There is no food chain. Bertrands position on the board is irrelevant here in this community.
Well, he's the one who brought it in the discussion, not me, so I was assuming he meant that Board members had more power than foot soldiers.
> He is a Stanbol committer and mentor only - one with a great deal of experience that is worth listening to,
I listen to Bertrand every time he speaks. Sometimes, rarely, I don't agree with him, mostly because we have different priorities, not because I think he's stupid.
> but a mentor and a committed only.
>
>>
>
>>
>>>>> It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links.
>>>>
>>>> Standard by written nowhere, as far as I can tell (and Google).
>>>
>>> It's true that the ASF can be poor at formally documenting things, we
>>> tend to rely on precedent and experience, that's why we have mentors.
>>> To help guide you in the way to succeed as an ASF project.
>>>
>>> http://markmail.org/search/list:apache+link+nofollow
>>>
>>> http://markmail.org/search/list:incubator+link+nofollow
>>
>> These two searches don't link to anything that seem to have any authoritative value (like a board decision).
>
> The board does not make decision for the projects. It helps guide them and handles foundation business, but it does not make decisions like this.
Who does then ? And where is it documented ?
>>> I'm done arguing. I've stated my position as a mentor, as has
>>> Bertrand. A sensible proposal has been made that Bertrand has
>>> explicitly supported (and I implicitly support by not objecting to
>>> it).
>>
>> Which one? Putting nofollow on the links or not?
>
> There should be nofollow links.
-1
>
>>
>> Since yours and Bertrand's position is to add rel=nofollow on the links, and since I don't agree with this position, let's vote.
>
> Why not make some space for the community to express their opinion first.
>
>> Now, as a mentor, can you explain us again (or point to a document which explains) how to conduct a vote ?
>
> You could start at http://community.apache.org/committers/index.html
>
> That gives a high level overview and links to other more detailed docs.
Thanks. Now I see that you have been even more misleading with you previous emails than I thought.
The document http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html which is linked from this document doesn't say that we're not allowed to give credit to the companies or organizations that are supporting / financing the projects. It only speaks about governance, which is a different matter.
Also note this sentence "It is important for the longevity and community health of our projects that they get the appropriate credit for producing our freely available software." Obviously, by denying our project the appropriate credit, you're harming the longevity and community health of this project.
>>> - if the majority of the community
>>> is happy with the proposal then this discussion is pointless.
>>
>> I'm assuming you're talking about the Stanbol community here. So +1.
>
> So please allow the community to speak before calling vote. That's not the best way to make decisions. See the links from the page above.
What's the best way then ? Hopefully not "shut up and listen to your mentors".
Then once again, by admitting that we can make a decision at the project level, you're considerably weakening your assertion that "this is the Apache way and you have to follow the rule" (paraphrasing).
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)
On 1 Jul 2011, at 18:13, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>> On 1 July 2011 13:54, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> I think your time spent arguing with false (cargo-cult) logic or bogus information (see below - the various links you give to support your position are bogus) is not only worthless, but counterproductive.
As a mentor it is my job to e sure that the project learns best practice in the ASF. Two mentors have mad the same assertions.
You can close not to accept out opinion, we are mentors. However you cannot refuse to listen and claim we are wasting time. I find this offensive and disrespectful.
We have told you how and where you can escalate this if you think we are not accurately representing the view of the ASF as a whole. You have refused to do so, instead accusing us of wasting your time.
Take it to the general list. If you are able to gather sufficient consensus for your position then you with find both Bertrand and I will back down.
>
>> To get there you need to adopt the successful model developed here at
>> the ASF and engaged with by many companies that have a considerably
>> higher investment in ASF projects than you do. The model works. It's
>> not perfect and it sometimes evolves. If you ant to try and have this
>> specific part of it evolve then take it to the wider community.
>
> Nope. That's not my job nor my priority.
It's your job to make Stanbol a success. Here in the ASF that means more than writing code. It means making the project sustainable through our tried and tested development model. You have mentors to help guide you so that if you choose to focus only on code you can do so.
>
>> Why are you so much better than everyone else around here? (rhetorical question)
>
> Obviously I'm not since, as Bertrand stated, I'm only a PPMC (whatever that means) and PPMCs are 2 steps down the food chain below board members.
There is no food chain. Bertrands position on the board is irrelevant here in this community. He is a Stanbol committer and mentor only - one with a great deal of experience that is worth listening to, but a mentor and a committed only.
>
>
>>>> It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links.
>>>
>>> Standard by written nowhere, as far as I can tell (and Google).
>>
>> It's true that the ASF can be poor at formally documenting things, we
>> tend to rely on precedent and experience, that's why we have mentors.
>> To help guide you in the way to succeed as an ASF project.
>>
>> http://markmail.org/search/list:apache+link+nofollow
>>
>> http://markmail.org/search/list:incubator+link+nofollow
>
> These two searches don't link to anything that seem to have any authoritative value (like a board decision).
The board does not make decision for the projects. It helps guide them and handles foundation business, but it does not make decisions like this.
>
>
>> I'm done arguing. I've stated my position as a mentor, as has
>> Bertrand. A sensible proposal has been made that Bertrand has
>> explicitly supported (and I implicitly support by not objecting to
>> it).
>
> Which one? Putting nofollow on the links or not?
There should be nofollow links.
>
> Since yours and Bertrand's position is to add rel=nofollow on the links, and since I don't agree with this position, let's vote.
Why not make some space for the community to express their opinion first.
> Now, as a mentor, can you explain us again (or point to a document which explains) how to conduct a vote ?
You could start at http://community.apache.org/committers/index.html
That gives a high level overview and links to other more detailed docs.
>
>> - if the majority of the community
>> is happy with the proposal then this discussion is pointless.
>
> I'm assuming you're talking about the Stanbol community here. So +1.
So please allow the community to speak before calling vote. That's not the best way to make decisions. See the links from the page above.
>
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 13:54, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Question 2: are you a "volunteer" on this project ?
>>>>
>>>> My answer: I'm not. I'm paid to work on this project.
>>>
>>> I am a volunteer.
>>
>> I'm speaking about people who are contributing to the project (code base).
>
> So my time in mentoring this project towards sustainability is
> worthless? My time working towards raising awareness of this project
> is worthless?
I think your time spent arguing with false (cargo-cult) logic or bogus information (see below - the various links you give to support your position are bogus) is not only worthless, but counterproductive.
> To get there you need to adopt the successful model developed here at
> the ASF and engaged with by many companies that have a considerably
> higher investment in ASF projects than you do. The model works. It's
> not perfect and it sometimes evolves. If you ant to try and have this
> specific part of it evolve then take it to the wider community.
Nope. That's not my job nor my priority.
>> 1. You seem to be your own employer (with another partner), so you're once again playing with words.
>
> My employment status and the little you know about it has no bearing
> on this discussion, I have an
> employer and they pay for my time.
OK. If you're paid for this work I don't consider you a volunteer then but it's not the point.
> Why are you so much better than everyone else around here? (rhetorical question)
Obviously I'm not since, as Bertrand stated, I'm only a PPMC (whatever that means) and PPMCs are 2 steps down the food chain below board members.
And I can't claim "hundred of year of experience with successful open source projects" since I'm only 42.
So obviously I won't play the authority card here (also because it's not my style).
>>> It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links.
>>
>> Standard by written nowhere, as far as I can tell (and Google).
>
> It's true that the ASF can be poor at formally documenting things, we
> tend to rely on precedent and experience, that's why we have mentors.
> To help guide you in the way to succeed as an ASF project.
>
> http://markmail.org/search/list:apache+link+nofollow
>
> http://markmail.org/search/list:incubator+link+nofollow
These two searches don't link to anything that seem to have any authoritative value (like a board decision).
> "sponsor logo and link ('nofollow' at the Bronze level) on the ASF"
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/sponsorship.html
This is about something different. Once again you're trying to confuse people.
And BTW, if sponsors above the Bronze level DON'T have a nofollow link, it's certainly not a general rule.
> I'm done arguing. I've stated my position as a mentor, as has
> Bertrand. A sensible proposal has been made that Bertrand has
> explicitly supported (and I implicitly support by not objecting to
> it).
Which one? Putting nofollow on the links or not?
Since yours and Bertrand's position is to add rel=nofollow on the links, and since I don't agree with this position, let's vote.
Now, as a mentor, can you explain us again (or point to a document which explains) how to conduct a vote ?
> If the community agrees with you then the community need to take this
> up on general@incubator.apache.org
Nope. Let's vote here, not in another list. This is our project and there is no ASF rule that you can point us to, so there is no reason to follow them.
> - if the majority of the community
> is happy with the proposal then this discussion is pointless.
I'm assuming you're talking about the Stanbol community here. So +1.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 13:54, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
...
> And by the companies who are members of this project.
Companies are *not* members of projects. People are that's the whole point.
> I'm starting to wonder why you keep forgetting this simple fact.
I'm not forgetting anything. This is the way *all* ASF project work.
It is fundamental part of the way we do things. As a project mentor
it's my job to communicate that.
>>> Question 2: are you a "volunteer" on this project ?
>>>
>>> My answer: I'm not. I'm paid to work on this project.
>>
>> I am a volunteer.
>
> I'm speaking about people who are contributing to the project (code base).
So my time in mentoring this project towards sustainability is
worthless? My time working towards raising awareness of this project
is worthless?
Maybe you think it is worthless, but if this project makes it to
be a TLP and your company reaps the rewards of third party
contributions as a result I suspect you'll have a different view in
the future.
To get there you need to adopt the successful model developed here at
the ASF and engaged with by many companies that have a considerably
higher investment in ASF projects than you do. The model works. It's
not perfect and it sometimes evolves. If you ant to try and have this
specific part of it evolve then take it to the wider community.
> 1. You seem to be your own employer (with another partner), so you're once again playing with words.
My employment status and the little you know about it has no bearing
on this discussion, I have an
employer and they pay for my time.
Why are you so much better than everyone else around here? (rhetorical question)
...
>> It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links.
>
> Standard by written nowhere, as far as I can tell (and Google).
It's true that the ASF can be poor at formally documenting things, we
tend to rely on precedent and experience, that's why we have mentors.
To help guide you in the way to succeed as an ASF project.
http://markmail.org/search/list:apache+link+nofollow
http://markmail.org/search/list:incubator+link+nofollow
"sponsor logo and link ('nofollow' at the Bronze level) on the ASF"
http://www.apache.org/foundation/sponsorship.html
I'm done arguing. I've stated my position as a mentor, as has
Bertrand. A sensible proposal has been made that Bertrand has
explicitly supported (and I implicitly support by not objecting to
it).
If the community agrees with you then the community need to take this
up on general@incubator.apache.org - if the majority of the community
is happy with the proposal then this discussion is pointless.
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:16 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 11:06, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> I am not saying you *cannot* credit employers who support their staff
>>> volunteering here.
>>
>> Once again, you're denying the reality here. Olivier and I are not "volunteering" here.
>
> As a mentor I am stating the language we use. *everyone* is a
> volunteer here.
If your language is just some newspeak disconnected from the reality, I don't care about your language.
We are not all volunteers. I am not, by the single fact that I'm paid by Nuxeo and the EU. And BTW this whole discussion is taking the "fun" part out the equation, so I'm doubly not a volunteer.
> It might seem like a nuance (or even a fundamental misunderstanding at
> this stage) but it is very important to the way Apache projects are
> developed. It's one of the mechanisms we use to ensure that nobody can
> "own" an Apache project.
Who are you accusing of wanting to "own" the project ?
> Everyone is expected to act as an individual,
> in the best interests of the project and its community first,
> sometimes this means going against the short term best interests of
> their employer in order to ensure the long term health of the project
> (which I assume is important to your employer).
Except that there is absolutely no proof that it does.
> If you are going to be at ApacheCon you might like to attend my "Can I
> depend on software built by volunteers?" talk. I address these issues
> in detail and explain why it works like this and why the word
> "volunteer" is often misunderstood.
I won't, and I don't agree with this vision. I think this vision hinders the progress of open source, because the answer of your question is obviously "no".
Of course, with *your* definition of "volunteer" maybe it's "yes" (or more probably, "yes, sometimes"), but since most people are using a different definition, you're just shooting yourself (and the open source community) in the foot by going this path.
Actually, even by your definition, there are projects that are made by "volunteers" (e.g. Apache Adbera) who are in such a pityfull state that I'm very sorry that I do depend on them.
But it's not the debate here.
>>> One way of crediting employers without
>>> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
>>> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
>>> links)
>>
>> Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
>
> Well, that's up to the community to resolve.
I thought there was a rule?
So now you're telling me that it's up to the community (I'm assuming you're meaning, the Stanbol community here) to decide.
Great. Let's vote.
> However, I will point out
> that it is highly unlikely for the IIPMC (of which I am a member) to
> allow links without nofollow. It is not allowed for anyone else
> (including most classes of financial sponsors).
Which is in my opinion stupid on your part, but that is your (ASF) problem, not mine.
>>> . This means the moment you vote someone in their employer gets
>>> credit. Another way (which is my preference) is you have a page
>>> listing *users* of the product (with nofollow links). This means
>>> everyone can submit a patch and have their employer listed.
>>
>> Come on. The EU is giving 6 MEUR to this project. Nuxeo is giving 50 KEUR. There is clearly a hierarchy.
>
> There is no hierarchy in a sustainable Apache project (that means a
> TLP, not an incubating project).
>
> The EU money will run out, Nuxeo may decide this isn't a direction
> they want to go in. What then?
We're not there yet. There is still 1 year 1/2 to go.
> The community needs to expand to be sustainable beyond the funding of
> the EU and a few other partners. That's why Stanbol is in incubation.
> All actions today need to prepare for the day when the money runs out.
Nope. We have other priorities, first of them being for the project to be successful in the EU sense.
I don't care if the project is a long time success if by doing so means that we (Nuxeo) don't get the final payments from the EU, or if we don't get the business benefits from our participation in the project.
(Of course, this is a rethorical observation, as I'm sure we can have both, that's the reason why I voted for the Apache Incubation - but I also warned against the risks of the Apache "bureaucracy").
>>> The ASF does not single out individual companies. If its not enough to
>>> get a load of free volunteer time on the software they want to use
>>> then they can do public speaking, they can publicly praise their
>>> Apache committers. They can be *seen* to engage with the project both
>>> here and at public events, like ApacheCon.
>>
>> I don't care about the ASF. I'm not even a member.
>
> Membership is earned. It cannot be bought or requested.
Another non-issue. I didn't asked or try to buy ASF membership.
> You may not
> care about the ASF but I assume you care about the code being produced
> in this specific ASF project. Do you want it to succeed in the long
> term? If so then you need to participate in ways that have been
> proven, in over 100 world leading projects, to work consistently.
Can you cite an example of a project that *failed* because the outgoing links didn't have the rel=nofollow attribute? Probably not. So you're just playing with false logic.
"100 successful open source projects did put rel=nofollow on their links, so if you don't put rel=nofollow, you will fail."
Of course:
1. This is cargo-cult logic at best.
2. There are thousands of successful open source projects who didn't put rel=nofollow on their links. What do you say about them?
> There is no need for you to work towards being a member,
Non-issue, again.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 11:06, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>
>> I am not saying you *cannot* credit employers who support their staff
>> volunteering here.
>
> Once again, you're denying the reality here. Olivier and I are not "volunteering" here.
As a mentor I am stating the language we use. *everyone* is a
volunteer here. You are paid outside the ASF, as am I. Nobody here can
dictate what you do with that time. that is one definition of
"volunteer", it is *not* a requirement that a volunteer works for no
money.
It might seem like a nuance (or even a fundamental misunderstanding at
this stage) but it is very important to the way Apache projects are
developed. It's one of the mechanisms we use to ensure that nobody can
"own" an Apache project. Everyone is expected to act as an individual,
in the best interests of the project and its community first,
sometimes this means going against the short term best interests of
their employer in order to ensure the long term health of the project
(which I assume is important to your employer)..
If you are going to be at ApacheCon you might like to attend my "Can I
depend on software built by volunteers?" talk. I address these issues
in detail and explain why it works like this and why the word
"volunteer" is often misunderstood.
>> One way of crediting employers without
>> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
>> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
>> links)
>
> Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
Well, that's up to the community to resolve. However, I will point out
that it is highly unlikely for the IIPMC (of which I am a member) to
allow links without nofollow. It is not allowed for anyone else
(including most classes of financial sponsors).
Of course, you are welcome to discuss this on
general@incubator.apache.org if you believe this is a mistake the ASF
has been repeating over and over for all these years.
>> . This means the moment you vote someone in their employer gets
>> credit. Another way (which is my preference) is you have a page
>> listing *users* of the product (with nofollow links). This means
>> everyone can submit a patch and have their employer listed.
>
> Come on. The EU is giving 6 MEUR to this project. Nuxeo is giving 50 KEUR. There is clearly a hierarchy.
There is no hierarchy in a sustainable Apache project (that means a
TLP, not an incubating project).
The EU money will run out, Nuxeo may decide this isn't a direction
they want to go in. What then?
The community needs to expand to be sustainable beyond the funding of
the EU and a few other partners. That's why Stanbol is in incubation.
All actions today need to prepare for the day when the money runs out.
For what it is worth I am *very* familiar with academic funded
projects and the dynamics found within them. I am a mentor on this
project because I don't want the problems with those structures to be
brought into the successful structures here in the ASF (and to help
the ASF understand where sensible compromise is possible, this is not,
in my opinion, one of those times).
>> The ASF does not single out individual companies. If its not enough to
>> get a load of free volunteer time on the software they want to use
>> then they can do public speaking, they can publicly praise their
>> Apache committers. They can be *seen* to engage with the project both
>> here and at public events, like ApacheCon.
>
> I don't care about the ASF. I'm not even a member.
Membership is earned. It cannot be bought or requested. You may not
care about the ASF but I assume you care about the code being produced
in this specific ASF project. Do you want it to succeed in the long
term? If so then you need to participate in ways that have been
proven, in over 100 world leading projects, to work consistently.
There is no need for you to work towards being a member, but there is
a need to act within this project in ways that are in the best
interests of the project even if they appear to be against the best
interests of your employer. Your mentors are attempting to explain why
this is an important issue and why all existing contributors to *all*
top level projects recognise the value in this position. This is not
something we are suggesting for Stanbol only.
If you are not convinced by our arguments then take it to a broader
audience (general@incubator.apache.org) - you'll find many hundreds of
years of combined experience of world leading open source project
communities on that list.
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:22 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 22:10, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>> you (and Ross) are dishonest in claiming that the rule about the sponsors also applies to the projects contributors credits pages.
>
> Neither of us has said that,
I 've been asking repeatedly for evidence that there was a rule about allowing links with no nofollow attr from project pages, and all you could come up was this page about sponsors.
Why bring this into the discussion? We're not talking about the sponsors here. (And even the case of the sponsors, the fact that gold sponsors don't have a nofollow attr makes your argument moot).
> we have both provided it as evidence of
> practice in the ASF and support for the argument that nofollow is
> important.
We're not discussing the importance of nofollow in general, we're discussing a specific case. You said repeatedly there were rules for the specific case we are discussing, and we've discovered that there aren't.
So now it's up to the Stanbol community to decide.
> An accusation of dishonesty is unacceptable. I chose to ignore such
> personal attacks in your other mails,
You would have had an argument here if you hadn't failed into the same fallacy in a previous message.
Anyway, I apologize fot this one.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 22:10, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> you (and Ross) are dishonest in claiming that the rule about the sponsors also applies to the projects contributors credits pages.
Neither of us has said that, we have both provided it as evidence of
practice in the ASF and support for the argument that nofollow is
important.
An accusation of dishonesty is unacceptable. I chose to ignore such
personal attacks in your other mails, but this is a step too far.
Please refrain from personal attacks in your responses and stick to
content as written.
Ross
Re: Pagerank, SEO etc. ...
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 2, 2011, at 12:15 AM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
> I find it quite unhealthy that a thread which began with the
> announcement that one of the members of this podling that he "started
> with a Apache Stanbol documentation" has now been transformed into an
> OT-thread about pagerank and SEO (and how the Apache Way does not work,
> which in my opinion is the core of the differences).
I have never said that.
> Even more unhealthy is that for one member the existence of a "nofollow"
> HTML-attribute seems to be so important that he indicated that he might
> have made his agreement with "moving the project to Apache" dependent on
> the non-use of that attribute.
I haven't said that (and if I said it - too tired to check - I didn't mean it).
What I mean is that there is a reality, that this project is mostly developed by the IKS project, and this can't be ignored.
> I do not see how such an attitude (and the aggressive tone involved) can
> help improving Apache Stanbol or develop *any* Open Source community. It
> takes time and energy away especially from creating and improving
> documentation - which is urgently needed to attract both, more users and
> more (and more productive) developers.
Indeed.
Will you be there at the workshop in Paris next week ?
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Pagerank, SEO etc. ...
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...The ASF members is famous for its regular 100-email threads...
I meant "ASF members mailing list" of course.
-Bertrand
Re: Pagerank, SEO etc. ...
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Andreas,
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de> wrote:
> ...I find it quite unhealthy that a thread which began with the
> announcement that one of the members of this podling that he "started
> with a Apache Stanbol documentation" has now been transformed into an
> OT-thread about pagerank and SEO (and how the Apache Way does not work,
> which in my opinion is the core of the differences)....
I agree with you but unfortunately such events are relatively common
in our world of email-mostly remote communication.
The ASF members is famous for its regular 100-email threads, and IMO
quite a number of them discuss topics that...well, might not be really
worth wasting time on. That's life I guess.
The good thing is that most of the Stanbol community stayed out of the
thread that you mention - as you say that thread mixes up a number of
issues that might be worth discussing one at a time, but are next to
impossible to discuss by email when mixed together.
We'll try to do better next time (including changing subject lines
when a thread switches topics) - for now as I've said there I'm out of
that particular discussion. People are welcome to discuss specific
things that were mentioned there of course, but that needs to happen
in a more constructive and focused way.
Thanks for expressing your concerns,
-Bertrand
Pagerank, SEO etc. ...
Posted by Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de>.
I find it quite unhealthy that a thread which began with the
announcement that one of the members of this podling that he "started
with a Apache Stanbol documentation" has now been transformed into an
OT-thread about pagerank and SEO (and how the Apache Way does not work,
which in my opinion is the core of the differences).
Even more unhealthy is that for one member the existence of a "nofollow"
HTML-attribute seems to be so important that he indicated that he might
have made his agreement with "moving the project to Apache" dependent on
the non-use of that attribute.
I do not see how such an attitude (and the aggressive tone involved) can
help improving Apache Stanbol or develop *any* Open Source community. It
takes time and energy away especially from creating and improving
documentation - which is urgently needed to attract both, more users and
more (and more productive) developers.
Cheers,
Andreas
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:38 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>> ....I am saying that employers do not fund the project.
>>
>> YES WE DO. Stop denying the reality. This is not the country of the Care Bears. An stop playing on the words. Just because we don't give money to the ASF doesn't mean we don't fund the project.
>>
>>> Nobody funds an ASF project.
>>
>> As I wrote, we do....
>
> Ok, so your company
... and yours, and some others, and the EC ...
> spends money to pay some of its employees so that
> they can contribute to Stanbol.
That's what I call funding (in part, but at this point, overwhelmingly so) the project.
> That's very cool, and it deserves
> credit for that, based on true facts and in a fair way compared to
> other contributors.
Indeed. Did I ask for something else than true facts and a fair way ? I don't think so.
> Simply listing Olivier as a Nuxeo employee on the Stanbol team page
> would be a nice recognition, don't you think?
Why "would" ? It's already there. I'm not asking for something that is already there, that would be stupid, don't you think ?
> Now, from the ASF's point of view we dont' care about how and where
> your company spends money. We care about Olivier doing a terrific job,
> but we won't give more power or more recognition to him or his
> employer than to the lone independent developer who's also doing a
> terrific job in Stanbol and financing that himself.
I never asked for this. Please don't caricature my request.
> That's why we say "we don't care how much company or org X is
> investing to support people to work on Apache projects". We care about
> the people who do the work, give them credit, we're happy to indicate
> who they're working for if they want, but that's pretty much it.
Same. I never asked that the Nuxeo contribution to the project be numerically quantified.
> The problem with links to companies without a nofollow attribute is
> that ASF sponsors don't get that below a certain sponsoring level (see
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/sponsorship.html) so I believe (and I
> think Ross agrees, so that's two Stanbol mentors) that it's not fair
> to give that to contributors to a project.
I do not agree. First, technically, http://www.apache.org/foundation/sponsorship.html has a PageRank of 8, when http://incubator.apache.org/stanbol/team.html has only a PageRank of 5, so there is a 1000 times (PageRank is on a log10 scale) difference between being listed as an ASF sponsor page (with no nofollow) and being listed in the Stanbol credits page.
Even if this was not the case, these are completely different issues, and you (and Ross) are dishonest in claiming that the rule about the sponsors also applies to the projects contributors credits pages.
Last, what do you mean by "not fair" here ? Not fair to whom ? Who's harmed if we don't put nofollow on the links ?
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> ....I am saying that employers do not fund the project.
>
> YES WE DO. Stop denying the reality. This is not the country of the Care Bears. An stop playing on the words. Just because we don't give money to the ASF doesn't mean we don't fund the project.
>
>> Nobody funds an ASF project.
>
> As I wrote, we do....
Ok, so your company spends money to pay some of its employees so that
they can contribute to Stanbol. That's very cool, and it deserves
credit for that, based on true facts and in a fair way compared to
other contributors.
Simply listing Olivier as a Nuxeo employee on the Stanbol team page
would be a nice recognition, don't you think? He's doing a terrific
job in Stanbol, so making the association should make whoever's
spending money to fund him happy.
Now, from the ASF's point of view we dont' care about how and where
your company spends money. We care about Olivier doing a terrific job,
but we won't give more power or more recognition to him or his
employer than to the lone independent developer who's also doing a
terrific job in Stanbol and financing that himself.
That's why we say "we don't care how much company or org X is
investing to support people to work on Apache projects". We care about
the people who do the work, give them credit, we're happy to indicate
who they're working for if they want, but that's pretty much it.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X/CREDITS.txt
is IMO a good example of crediting people and companies based on true
facts, without mentioning any monetary amount or lines of code etc. -
somebody donated something cool to the project, Cocoon gives them
credit, that's it. People who know about the project or study it will
find out how much value each part and each contributor bring.
The problem with links to companies without a nofollow attribute is
that ASF sponsors don't get that below a certain sponsoring level (see
http://www.apache.org/foundation/sponsorship.html) so I believe (and I
think Ross agrees, so that's two Stanbol mentors) that it's not fair
to give that to contributors to a project.
Hope this helps clarify things.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> I am not saying you *cannot* credit employers who support their staff
> volunteering here.
Once again, you're denying the reality here. Olivier and I are not "volunteering" here. We are working on the project because *the company* has decided that it was a useful way to spend our time (and because we are contractually mandated to work on the project due to our contract with the EU).
> I am saying that employers do not fund the project.
YES WE DO. Stop denying the reality. This is not the country of the Care Bears. An stop playing on the words. Just because we don't give money to the ASF doesn't mean we don't fund the project.
> Nobody funds an ASF project.
As I wrote, we do.
> One way of crediting employers without
> having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
> committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
> links)
Yeah right. This is absolutely unacceptable for me.
> . This means the moment you vote someone in their employer gets
> credit. Another way (which is my preference) is you have a page
> listing *users* of the product (with nofollow links). This means
> everyone can submit a patch and have their employer listed.
Come on. The EU is giving 6 MEUR to this project. Nuxeo is giving 50 KEUR. There is clearly a hierarchy.
> (for clarity I not arguing for my company to be credited, it's not
> important and I am here as a volunteer, I am merely providing an
> example of how difficult these things can be)
>
>>> IKS is welcome to make donations to the ASF
>>
>> I'm not talking about donations to the ASF and you perfectly know that.
>
> I think Bertrand was making the point that even companies who donate
> directly to the ASF do not *fund* Apache projects.
Red herring.
>> Nuxeo is funding part of the effort and out of that funding, expects to see some respect and some love.
>
> The ASF does not single out individual companies. If its not enough to
> get a load of free volunteer time on the software they want to use
> then they can do public speaking, they can publicly praise their
> Apache committers. They can be *seen* to engage with the project both
> here and at public events, like ApacheCon.
I don't care about the ASF. I'm not even a member.
> Recognition comes from action not money. the money stays outside the ASF.
Action is funded by money. Who do you think pays my salary and Olivier's ?
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 July 2011 09:51, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>>> ... Apache projects are not funded by external entities,
>>>
>>> This particular one, at least (and probably most of the others) are. Or are you implying everyone is working on these projects for free ?
>>
>> No, Stanbol is not funded by IKS.
>
> You obviously have a very different different notion of "being funded" than me.
>
> For me, there is money being spent by some organizations to make the project happen. I call this being funded.
>
> What don't you like about this definition ?
I'm not going to provide Bertrands definition, but I will add my
weight to Bertrands statement.
The ASF does not bring money into the equation of evaluating its
projects and their contributors. Everything done here is voluntary and
everyone is an equal as a result.
Crediting IKS sets a precedent for which, as Bertrand says elsewhere,
you need rules about who is and is not credited.
Should my previous employer be credited? I've done nothing but read a
bunch of emails and, occasionally post a few mentor guidance notes.
But my time was being paid for by them. What about now that I no
longer work for them? What about my new employer - they are paying for
my time right now - are they funding the project?
If you say no then this can damage the community. It creates an us and
them. It creates a hierarchy of importance as I am being treated as a
lesser individual than those funded by IKS.
I am not saying you *cannot* credit employers who support their staff
volunteering here. I am saying that employers do not fund the project.
Nobody funds an ASF project. One way of crediting employers without
having to create a whole raft of red tape is have a page on which
committers can optionally add their employers details (with nofollow
links). This means the moment you vote someone in their employer gets
credit. Another way (which is my preference) is you have a page
listing *users* of the product (with nofollow links). This means
everyone can submit a patch and have their employer listed.
(for clarity I not arguing for my company to be credited, it's not
important and I am here as a volunteer, I am merely providing an
example of how difficult these things can be)
>> IKS is welcome to make donations to the ASF
>
> I'm not talking about donations to the ASF and you perfectly know that.
I think Bertrand was making the point that even companies who donate
directly to the ASF do not *fund* Apache projects.
> Nuxeo is funding part of the effort and out of that funding, expects to see some respect and some love.
The ASF does not single out individual companies. If its not enough to
get a load of free volunteer time on the software they want to use
then they can do public speaking, they can publicly praise their
Apache committers. They can be *seen* to engage with the project both
here and at public events, like ApacheCon.
Recognition comes from action not money. the money stays outside the ASF.
Ross
Ross
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
>> ...*If* there is an issue about acknowledgements, I could imagine to do it
>> similar to other projects [3] (arbitrarily chosen), where the community
>> members are listed together with their companies....
>
> Yes that's my general idea as well...
>
> To Stefane, I have no problem with Stanbol recognizing Nuxeo's support
> of you and your colleague's work - it's just that it has to be done in
> a way that ensures fairness for everyone involved in Stanbol.
I have no problem with this either. I had a significant problem with your affirmation "Stanbol is not funded by IKS."
Listing the individual contributors with their affiliation is absolutely OK with me, as long as there is always an hyperlink from "Nuxeo" to "http://www.nuxeo.com/en".
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...*If* there is an issue about acknowledgements, I could imagine to do it
> similar to other projects [3] (arbitrarily chosen), where the community
> members are listed together with their companies....
Yes that's my general idea as well...
To Stefane, I have no problem with Stanbol recognizing Nuxeo's support
of you and your colleague's work - it's just that it has to be done in
a way that ensures fairness for everyone involved in Stanbol.
(I'll reply to Stefane's other comments later, or discuss next week as
we'll be meeting f2f in Paris - busybusy now)
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
> I do not want to make this a big issue, therefore agree with:
>
>
> "The Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the European R&D project IKS -
> Interactive Knowledge Stack[1]."
>
> One could also add:
>
> Some people who are working on the project are part-funded by the IKS
> project, as well as by several European SME CMS providers, who are adopting
> [2] the Apache Stanbol.
Works for me and let's discuss more specific acknowledgements later.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org>.
I do not want to make this a big issue, therefore agree with:
"The Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the European R&D project
IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack[1]."
One could also add:
Some people who are working on the project are part-funded by the IKS
project, as well as by several European SME CMS providers, who are
adopting [2] the Apache Stanbol.
*If* there is an issue about acknowledgements, I could imagine to do it
similar to other projects [3] (arbitrarily chosen), where the community
members are listed together with their companies.
Better?
Andreas
[1] http://www.iks-project.eu/
[2] http://wiki.iks-project.eu/index.php/Participants
[3] https://aries.apache.org/community/people.html
Stefane Fermigier schrieb:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>>> ... Apache projects are not funded by external entities,
>>> This particular one, at least (and probably most of the others) are. Or are you implying everyone is working on these projects for free ?
>> No, Stanbol is not funded by IKS.
>
> You obviously have a very different different notion of "being funded" than me.
>
> For me, there is money being spent by some organizations to make the project happen. I call this being funded.
>
> What don't you like about this definition ?
>
>> IKS is welcome to make donations to the ASF
>
> I'm not talking about donations to the ASF and you perfectly know that.
>
>>>> I suggest
>>>> changing this to just "the Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the
>>>> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack" with the link.
>>> How about: "Some people who are working on the Apache Stanbol project are funded by European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack, as well as several european SME [list the SMEs]" ?
>> Right now, I'm ok with that if we mention IKS only, and if we want to
>> be complete we should add "until the end of 2012".
>>
>> If you want to add company names to that, we need to define rules that
>> make sure that's done in a fair way. Do we include independents
>> working on Stanbol on their own time, for example? Do we include
>> companies whose employees submitted just one patch? This needs a
>> separate discussion, so right now I'd say include IKS only.
>
> Nuxeo is funding part of the effort and out of that funding, expects to see some respect and some love.
>
> That's probably true for the other contributing organizations, but I won't speak for them.
>
> S.
>
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>> ... Apache projects are not funded by external entities,
>>
>> This particular one, at least (and probably most of the others) are. Or are you implying everyone is working on these projects for free ?
>
> No, Stanbol is not funded by IKS.
You obviously have a very different different notion of "being funded" than me.
For me, there is money being spent by some organizations to make the project happen. I call this being funded.
What don't you like about this definition ?
> IKS is welcome to make donations to the ASF
I'm not talking about donations to the ASF and you perfectly know that.
>>> I suggest
>>> changing this to just "the Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the
>>> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack" with the link.
>>
>> How about: "Some people who are working on the Apache Stanbol project are funded by European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack, as well as several european SME [list the SMEs]" ?
>
> Right now, I'm ok with that if we mention IKS only, and if we want to
> be complete we should add "until the end of 2012".
>
> If you want to add company names to that, we need to define rules that
> make sure that's done in a fair way. Do we include independents
> working on Stanbol on their own time, for example? Do we include
> companies whose employees submitted just one patch? This needs a
> separate discussion, so right now I'd say include IKS only.
Nuxeo is funding part of the effort and out of that funding, expects to see some respect and some love.
That's probably true for the other contributing organizations, but I won't speak for them.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>... Apache projects are not funded by external entities,
>
> This particular one, at least (and probably most of the others) are. Or are you implying everyone is working on these projects for free ?
No, Stanbol is not funded by IKS. IKS is welcome to make donations to
the ASF if that's desired, but such donations only apply to the global
ASF budget, not to specific projects.
People working on Stanbol being funded IKS is something that happens
between those people and IKS, the ASF does not have anything to do
with that.
>
>> I suggest
>> changing this to just "the Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the
>> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack" with the link.
>
> How about: "Some people who are working on the Apache Stanbol project are funded by European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack, as well as several european SME [list the SMEs]" ?
Right now, I'm ok with that if we mention IKS only, and if we want to
be complete we should add "until the end of 2012".
If you want to add company names to that, we need to define rules that
make sure that's done in a fair way. Do we include independents
working on Stanbol on their own time, for example? Do we include
companies whose employees submitted just one patch? This needs a
separate discussion, so right now I'd say include IKS only.
-Bertrand
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Stefane Fermigier <sf...@nuxeo.com>.
On Jul 1, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
>> existing material....
>
> Cool, thanks for this!
>
> I briefly reviewed, one comment about [1]:
>
> "Apache Stanbol project was initiated and is part-funded by the
> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack for small to
> medium CMS providers."
>
> Apache projects are not funded by external entities,
This particular one, at least (and probably most of the others) are. Or are you implying everyone is working on these projects for free ?
> I suggest
> changing this to just "the Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the
> European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack" with the link.
How about: "Some people who are working on the Apache Stanbol project are funded by European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack, as well as several european SME [list the SMEs]" ?
S.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Bertrand
>
>> [1] http://stanbol.staging.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/
--
Stefane Fermigier, Founder and Chairman, Nuxeo
Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com/ - +33 1 40 33 79 87 - http://twitter.com/sfermigier
Join the Nuxeo Group on LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/groups?gid=43314
New Nuxeo release: http://nuxeo.com/dm54
"There's no such thing as can't. You always have a choice."
Re: Apache Stanbol Documentation
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Andreas Gruber <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've started with a Apache Stanbol documentation by putting together
> existing material....
Cool, thanks for this!
I briefly reviewed, one comment about [1]:
"Apache Stanbol project was initiated and is part-funded by the
European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack for small to
medium CMS providers."
Apache projects are not funded by external entities, I suggest
changing this to just "the Apache Stanbol project was initiated by the
European R&D project IKS - Interactive Knowledge Stack" with the link.
Thanks,
-Bertrand
> [1] http://stanbol.staging.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/