JMeter PMC issues

[Michael Stover <ms...@apache.org>]

The Jakarta PMC is not going to allow a JMeter release unless it can be
backed by 3 Jakarta PMC members.  I'm the only current JMeter committer
who's also on the Jakarta PMC, which means we need two more - the only
candidates are Sebastian and Peter.  They have already been nominated
and the stream of +1 votes is going on now.

Another option, however, is to take JMeter to a top-level project
(jmeter.apache.org) where it would have it's own PMC (probably again the
three of us).  I'm not what the consequences are of that, if any - I've
got an inquiry in.

My personal preference is to make JMeter a top-level project.  Jakarta
wants us out anyway, and it seems inevitable in the long run.  Might as
well get it over with is my feeling.

-Mike


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: JMeter PMC issues

[Peter Lin <wo...@gmail.com>]

If I have to become a PMC, then might as well become a top level. We
might as well do the subversion thing at the same time.

peter


On 7/29/05, Michael Stover <ms...@apache.org> wrote:
> The Jakarta PMC is not going to allow a JMeter release unless it can be
> backed by 3 Jakarta PMC members.  I'm the only current JMeter committer
> who's also on the Jakarta PMC, which means we need two more - the only
> candidates are Sebastian and Peter.  They have already been nominated
> and the stream of +1 votes is going on now.
> 
> Another option, however, is to take JMeter to a top-level project
> (jmeter.apache.org) where it would have it's own PMC (probably again the
> three of us).  I'm not what the consequences are of that, if any - I've
> got an inquiry in.
> 
> My personal preference is to make JMeter a top-level project.  Jakarta
> wants us out anyway, and it seems inevitable in the long run.  Might as
> well get it over with is my feeling.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: JMeter PMC issues

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

On 7/29/05, Michael Stover <ms...@apache.org> wrote:
> The Jakarta PMC is not going to allow a JMeter release unless it can be
> backed by 3 Jakarta PMC members.  I'm the only current JMeter committer
> who's also on the Jakarta PMC, which means we need two more - the only
> candidates are Sebastian and Peter.  They have already been nominated
> and the stream of +1 votes is going on now.

Usually kept private to avoid a -1 offending by the way :)

I'm sure they would have been on the PMC a long time ago, but there's
still a perception that the PMC is some managing board and not just
the collection of active committers to Jakarta subprojects.

> Another option, however, is to take JMeter to a top-level project
> (jmeter.apache.org) where it would have it's own PMC (probably again the
> three of us).  I'm not what the consequences are of that, if any - I've
> got an inquiry in.

Just replied. Here's the post:

Basics are:

* You'd be on the front page of Apache as Apache JMeter (or at least until
we run out of space and have to rethink that page). Generally a higher level
in the hierarchy/branding. Though you can call yourself Apache JMeter right
now brandwise too.

* You'd (have to) form your own PMC. This allows your PMC to focus on your
issues rather than all of Jakarta.

* Direct board communication. One of you would report to the board every 3
months (and once a month for the first few months), and you'd be aware of
the board issues earlier.

* The majority of the ASF memberwise is in favour of a flatter Apache with
more TLPs (or was 3 years ago, by a slim majority I believe).

> My personal preference is to make JMeter a top-level project.  Jakarta
> wants us out anyway, and it seems inevitable in the long run.  Might as
> well get it over with is my feeling.

-1 on Jakarta wanting you out anyway. 

[and now with chair hat largely off]

Personally I think we're reaching a point where the large subprojects
have all moved to TLP. Slide is planning to move, I'm unsure how large
Turbine is nowadays and Commons is kind of blocked by the dead
commons.apache.org project. I get the feeling that Tapestry  is
growing quickly to become one of our large subprojects.

This puts us at a cusp point of whether the smaller projects should
head in the same direction. POI, JMeter, Cactus spring to mind as
active but small. I don't think the jury has even turned up yet, as
it's something I've been mulling over how best to bring up on
general@jakarta.

Moving the larger projects to TLP is essential as unless we can create
our own hierarchical management structure within Jakarta, it's too
much for a single PMC and chair. However our existing structure can
manage a collective of smaller projects.

[chair hat on]

However, I'm +0 on JMeter going to TLP. If you want to do it, I'm all
for it and will support you however I can. I know that it's the
direction the board would like to go but I also worry that we're
reaching the point where the TLPs are going to get too small and the
board will be overwhelmed.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: JMeter PMC issues

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

On 8/2/05, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see no pressing need to become a TLP, but I'm not against the idea.

I'd like to reopen this idea again :)

I think it's time to simplify Jakarta, chiefly to:

a) improve oversight by making me a middleman on less things.

b) help provide Jakarta with identity by flattening Jakarta into a
'Apache Java Reusable Components' type concept. ie) Commons + other
components.

Some thoughts:

1) jmeter.apache.org? testing.apache.org? (or some other test thing).
Would testing.apache.org contain cactus and jmeter? (obviously
something to ask them too).

2) I'd like to offer to be on the new pmc mailing list to offer advice
etc if you'd want me.

Not that I'm starting to push or anything, but I am :)

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: JMeter PMC issues

[sebb <se...@gmail.com>]

On 30/07/05, robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 08:02 -0400, Michael Stover wrote:
> > The Jakarta PMC is not going to allow a JMeter release unless it can be
> > backed by 3 Jakarta PMC members.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> this isn't just a jakarta thing but apache wide.
> 
> it is not possible to create an official ASF release without the backing
> of three pmc members. for legal reasons, only votes by pmc members can
> be binding. (each pmc is a committee and can act on behalf of the ASF:
> individual committers cannot.) i know that this isn't how many projects
> operated in the past but this change is inevitable.
> 
> the major advantage that this structure gives is that release managers
> gain some measure of legal protection (they are acting on behalf of the
> ASF) and could be defended by the ASF in any action against them.
> 
> jmeter isn't the only jakarta sub-project which is going to have to deal
> with this issue in the next few months but it just happens to have
> bubbled to the top first...
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > My personal preference is to make JMeter a top-level project.  Jakarta
> > wants us out anyway, and it seems inevitable in the long run.  Might as
> > well get it over with is my feeling.
> 
> i don't think anyone wants to force jmeter to leave (i'm sorry if i gave
> that impression).
> 
> the only way to avoid management is for active committers to be pmc
> members. that way, normal votes on the jmeter list would be binding
> legally and there's no need for any extra layers of management. life
> proceeds pretty much as it has done in the past. everyone's happy :)
> 
> the easiest way to achieve this would be for the active jmeter
> committers to accept nominations to the jakarta pmc. if the active

OK by me - seems the simplest (minimum effort) solution, assuming we
can get enough +1s...

> jmeter committers don't feel comfortable with that then they could move
> to their own TLP. alternatively, jmeter could ask to join the tomcat

I see no pressing need to become a TLP, but I'm not against the idea.

> TLP. there is no escaping the need for active committers to sign up as
> members of some pmc, though.
> 

S.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org