You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucy.apache.org by Apache Wiki <wi...@apache.org> on 2010/06/28 16:36:58 UTC
[Lucy Wiki] Update of "LucyIncubatorProposal" by PeterKarman
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Lucy Wiki" for change notification.
The "LucyIncubatorProposal" page has been changed by PeterKarman.
http://wiki.apache.org/lucy/LucyIncubatorProposal?action=diff&rev1=5&rev2=6
--------------------------------------------------
This process of renewal is vital to the long term health of Apache projects. This is the right place to demonstrate that this process is understood by the proposers. Example (OFBiz): OFBiz was originally created by David E. Jones and Andy Zeneski in May 2001. The project now has committers and users from around the world. The newer committers of the project joined in subsequent years by initially submitting patches, then having commit privileges for some of the applications, and then privileges over a larger range of applications... Example (Beehive): We plan to do everything possible to encourage an environment that supports a meritocracy. One of the lessons that the XMLBeans committers have learned is that meritocracies don't just evolve from good intentions; they require actively asking the community for help, listing/specifying the work that needs to be done, and keeping track of and encouraging members of the community who make any contributions...
=== Community ===
- Apache is interested only in communities.
+ Lucy currently has a small community, many members of which originated in the KinoSearch community.
- Candidates should start with a community and have the potential to grow and renew this community by attracting new users and developers. Explain how the proposal fits this vision. Example (Beehive): BEA has been building a community around predecessors to this framework for the last two years. There is currently an active newsgroup that should help us build a new community at Apache... Example (WebWork2): The WebWork 2 community has a strong following with active mailing lists and forums... Example (WADI): The need for a full service clustering and caching component in the open source is tremendous as its use can be applied in many areas, thus providing the potential for an incredibly large community...
+ Lucy's chief challenge is growing its community, which it hopes to achieve through efforts in two areas: reaching a 1.0 release, and actively reaching out to its target audience, users and developers in the dynamic language communities who want a fast, scalable full-text search solution in their native language.
=== Core Developers ===
Apache is composed of individuals.
Re: [Lucy] Re: [Lucy Wiki] Update of "LucyIncubatorProposal" by PeterKarman
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 09:00:46PM -0500, Peter Karman wrote:
> Marvin Humphrey wrote on 6/28/10 12:34 PM:
>
> > Random thoughts:
> >
> > * I think it would be good to emphasize that this proposal is a response to
> > suggestions from the Lucene PMC about community growth and fast releases.
> > I'd like to show that we intend to make good, conscientious use of the
> > mentoring that the Incubator offers, and also that this is a logical,
> > natural move for Lucy to make.
>
> Seems to fit under Proposal or Background. It's a key part of the story, and as
> such should probably not be "safely ignored by domain experts" in the Background
> section. That seems to be the litmus test for what goes in Background vs Proposal.
I was leaning towards Current Status, but Background seems like a better
choice, looking at what e.g. Chukwa, BlueSky, and ChatterBot put in that
section.
> > * Somewhere we should indicate that the technical goals of the original Lucy
> > project has been achieved, and that now that that's happened we are ready
> > for a new phase focusing on community growth.
>
> Under Proposal?
I think probably under Background again, but I'm not sure. Ordinarily
Proposal just describes what the project *does*, but our case is a little odd.
The guidelines explicitly state that we don't have to adhere to the template
exactly, so we can add, remove, or expand sections -- so long as we address
the spirit of all concerns.
Ah well, things will probably become clear as the draft nears completion...
> > * The Apache values I care about most are code base transparency and
> > controlled competition. Code base transparency is important because making
> > the code easy to work with makes it easier to contribute, increasing both
> > quantity and quality of contributions. Controlled competition provides
> > motivation which increases quality of contribution. I'm not sure where to
> > put those items; community is one possibility.
>
> Looks like you have this under Alignment now?
Yes. I'm pleased with how that section turned out; it accurately describes
what I feel are some of the biggest reasons why Lucy belongs at Apache, but
perhaps more importantly, I think it demonstrates that we have a sophisticated
understanding of what Apache is looking for. And hopefully it expresses
values that you (idiomatic APIs, usability) and Nate (code simplicity) feel
are important as well.
...
Schedule-wise, I'd like to get rough draft language in all sections by the end
of tomorrow. That leaves us Thursday to revise, followed by a final QA pass
on Friday morning prior to submission. I'll also draw up a draft of the
accompanying post to general@lucene tomorrow. Sound like a plan?
It doesn't have to be perfect, but the better it is, the better a position
we'll be in to take advantage of the feedback we get from the Lucene PMC. And
FWIW, both Grant and Doug are on the Incubator PMC as well.
Marvin Humphrey
Re: [Lucy] Re: [Lucy Wiki] Update of "LucyIncubatorProposal" by PeterKarman
Posted by Peter Karman <pe...@peknet.com>.
Marvin Humphrey wrote on 6/28/10 12:34 PM:
> Random thoughts:
>
> * I think it would be good to emphasize that this proposal is a response to
> suggestions from the Lucene PMC about community growth and fast releases.
> I'd like to show that we intend to make good, conscientious use of the
> mentoring that the Incubator offers, and also that this is a logical,
> natural move for Lucy to make.
Seems to fit under Proposal or Background. It's a key part of the story, and as
such should probably not be "safely ignored by domain experts" in the Background
section. That seems to be the litmus test for what goes in Background vs Proposal.
> * Somewhere we should indicate that the technical goals of the original Lucy
> project has been achieved, and that now that that's happened we are ready
> for a new phase focusing on community growth.
Under Proposal?
> * The Apache values I care about most are code base transparency and
> controlled competition. Code base transparency is important because making
> the code easy to work with makes it easier to contribute, increasing both
> quantity and quality of contributions. Controlled competition provides
> motivation which increases quality of contribution. I'm not sure where to
> put those items; community is one possibility.
Looks like you have this under Alignment now?
--
Peter Karman . http://peknet.com/ . peter@peknet.com
Re: [Lucy Wiki] Update of "LucyIncubatorProposal" by PeterKarman
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 02:36:58PM -0000, Apache Wiki wrote:
> === Community ===
> - Apache is interested only in communities.
> + Lucy currently has a small community, many members of which originated in the KinoSearch community.
> + Lucy's chief challenge is growing its community, which it hopes to achieve through efforts in two areas: reaching a 1.0 release, and actively reaching out to its target audience, users and developers in the dynamic language communities who want a fast, scalable full-text search solution in their native language.
While you were writing this I was in the coffee shop discussing "coopetition"
with a social scientist friend of mine. :)
Random thoughts:
* I think it would be good to emphasize that this proposal is a response to
suggestions from the Lucene PMC about community growth and fast releases.
I'd like to show that we intend to make good, conscientious use of the
mentoring that the Incubator offers, and also that this is a logical,
natural move for Lucy to make.
* Somewhere we should indicate that the technical goals of the original Lucy
project has been achieved, and that now that that's happened we are ready
for a new phase focusing on community growth.
* The Apache values I care about most are code base transparency and
controlled competition. Code base transparency is important because making
the code easy to work with makes it easier to contribute, increasing both
quantity and quality of contributions. Controlled competition provides
motivation which increases quality of contribution. I'm not sure where to
put those items; community is one possibility.
* Dave Balmain contributed many important ideas while he was active, but all
the code that has ever gone into the existing Lucy repository was written
by the KinoSearch community.
Marvin Humphrey