You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to labs@labs.apache.org by Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com> on 2017/03/07 21:26:14 UTC
On Labs identity (Blue Sky thoughts)
(Just joined due to the Committer list's call to action).
I think the question of Lab's identity is where it fits in the
_modern_ ecosystem. Its original offering (VM, etc) as mentioned on
some of the messages in the archive is not sustainable.
Github/Gitlab is more visible, offers more control and is integrated
more with additional awesome services, never mind being a
social-development destination. VMs are kind of cheap. I am putting a
lot more than $5/month into my Open Source Project of Choice. Running
a $5/month VM is just one of those things. And setting up VM with Labs
is probably as - or more - difficult than doing it on Digital Ocean or
whatever.
So, is Labs then a sub-project level of offering to Apache Committers?
Something that is smaller than a project but is still somehow
"Apache"? Again, that does not seem to be enough of an incentive for
technical reasons.
What about for the community reasons? Can the identity be reformulated
(or reinforced) to be a lot more about community than about technical
offering? In fact, reading the By-laws, I get all warm and fuzzy and
excited, especially about the last part of the last para:
"Apache Labs are the place where ASF committers can work on
innovative, blue-sky and off-the-wall ideas, without having to worry
about fitting in an existing project bylaw or building a community
around it, but unlike other external venues that can offer similar
hosting services, as a place where fellow committers can offer
suggestions and help."
So, if _I_ was interpreting these ByLaws, I would sort of focus them
inwards on a lot more dogfooding _across_ Apache projects with Labs
being that inner space where different communities can meet. Ideally,
it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
projects.
To take a semi-technical example, it would be great to have somebody
who has Technical Documentation skills, somebody who is good sysadmin
and somebody who has good technical/demo building skills and them
going around multiple Apache projects and helping them to build their
"hello world" examples that make it easier for the beginners to get
going. I bet after 3-5 runs through "take a project, build it, make a
basic dockerized example for it, push the examples and bugs discovered
back to the community", it will become an easy thing to do well. And
most communities would love it. And Labs could be the space that sets
up an infrastructure to help those people do it. Even if that
infrastructure is not actually running on Apache Infra.
Labs could also be the one with the strong Call to Action. I have
search expertise for example (Apache Solr). I do a number of
mini-projects around Solr that are not direct code contribution. I
would be happy to step into other projects that are downstream from
Solr and provide my Solr expertise to their committers by reviewing
their setup or helping to explain to them why they have troubles
migrating to latest Solr. But they don't really call and if they do
call, most of the time, you are then expected to find your own path
from the start to the level of contribution. If there was an umbrella
of people helping to mentor people already in ASF into helping them to
cross-contribute to other projects, this could be a lot easier. Labs
could be one collecting such willing experts and connecting/enabling
them.
Could Labs be the place where people with different first language
hang out and help to translate "Hello World" tutorials into other
languages, using common infrastructure they don't have to reinvent.
Discovery of educational resources for open-source projects is
actually a big issue, giving a centralized space (basically a
well-referenced blog) is a step in a right direction. Again, this
could happen spontaneously by just individual efforts, but having a
coordinated effort in removing all barriers towards that happening
consistently and in repeated fashion, could encourage contributions.
We already have http://community.apache.org/, which focuses on less
technical aspects and on on-boarding (for those who find it, similar
problem really....). Could Labs be complimentary to that, by focusing
on technical aspects of building the community and focusing a lot more
on getting more senior members of community to contribute back in in
the mentoring ways?
Now, this is very Blue Sky and I - for one - would not be in a
position to lead this kind of evolution. But since Blue Sky is in the
By-laws, I felt it was not unreasonable to express my thoughts.
Regards,
Alex.
----
http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
Re: On Labs identity (Blue Sky thoughts)
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Then it would be great if one could clarify the role of the PMC and what
the deliverables would/should be.
Hadrian
On 03/13/2017 01:29 PM, Danny Angus wrote:
> I think this is great "... Labs being that inner space where different
> communities can meet. Ideally,
> it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
> different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
> projects."
>
> But I would see it more in terms of being the place where new projects
> are born, and cross project experiments are run.
>
> d.
>
>
>
>
> On 8 March 2017 at 01:54, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Mar 7, 2017, at 16:26, Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> (Just joined due to the Committer list's call to action).
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I must say, I had not noticed the \u201cLabs\u201d link under \u201cInnovation\u201d at the bottom of the home page before, nor did I know about it. I am curious in success stories (or even past feedback on it), and too, how is this different than a current project possibly making a separate repository for something, and then later branching it off into a separate project at ASF?
>>
>>> I think the question of Lab's identity is where it fits in the
>>> _modern_ ecosystem. Its original offering (VM, etc) as mentioned on
>>> some of the messages in the archive is not sustainable.
>>>
>>> Github/Gitlab is more visible, offers more control and is integrated
>>> more with additional awesome services, never mind being a
>>> social-development destination.
>>
>> Would what you are saying here differ or does it differ from the same concept of repositories and mirror on GitHub as the rest of Apache? I think GitHub is certainly a perfect place to host repos, but it seems we do that now with mirroring etc, but we can\u2019t just create repos there easily.
>>
>>> VMs are kind of cheap. I am putting a
>>> lot more than $5/month into my Open Source Project of Choice. Running
>>> a $5/month VM is just one of those things. And setting up VM with Labs
>>> is probably as - or more - difficult than doing it on Digital Ocean or
>>> whatever.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe this is a different topic if we are talking about infrastructure. What infra would be provided or should be provided by Apache; even Apache Labs? I know there are some things that can be provided, but my understanding is internally that is fairly limited to some build tools, and occasionally project specific items such as a system to run a plugin portal or something specific to a project (negotiated or otherwise). I may be missing something, and will (re-)read the labs pages.
>>
>>> So, is Labs then a sub-project level of offering to Apache Committers?
>>> Something that is smaller than a project but is still somehow
>>> "Apache"? Again, that does not seem to be enough of an incentive for
>>> technical reasons.
>>>
>>> What about for the community reasons? Can the identity be reformulated
>>> (or reinforced) to be a lot more about community than about technical
>>> offering? In fact, reading the By-laws, I get all warm and fuzzy and
>>> excited, especially about the last part of the last para:
>>> "Apache Labs are the place where ASF committers can work on
>>> innovative, blue-sky and off-the-wall ideas, without having to worry
>>> about fitting in an existing project bylaw or building a community
>>> around it, but unlike other external venues that can offer similar
>>> hosting services, as a place where fellow committers can offer
>>> suggestions and help.\u201d
>>>
>>
>> To me that suggests the idea is to be lighter than incubator or dev proper, and to then allow committers a space to play in Apache, and get others involved, and then to possibly move items to the incubator and beyond, or not even. I like this interpretation a lot. People and committers can see what we are doing or possibly thinking about doing, and let\u2019s ideas flow without having to have consensus first, but still has association with the organization.
>>
>>> So, if _I_ was interpreting these ByLaws, I would sort of focus them
>>> inwards on a lot more dogfooding _across_ Apache projects with Labs
>>> being that inner space where different communities can meet. Ideally,
>>> it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
>>> different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
>>> projects.
>>>
>>> To take a semi-technical example, it would be great to have somebody
>>> who has Technical Documentation skills, somebody who is good sysadmin
>>> and somebody who has good technical/demo building skills and them
>>> going around multiple Apache projects and helping them to build their
>>> "hello world" examples that make it easier for the beginners to get
>>> going. I bet after 3-5 runs through "take a project, build it, make a
>>> basic dockerized example for it, push the examples and bugs discovered
>>> back to the community", it will become an easy thing to do well. And
>>> most communities would love it. And Labs could be the space that sets
>>> up an infrastructure to help those people do it. Even if that
>>> infrastructure is not actually running on Apache Infra.
>>>
>>
>> I\u2019m not sure that would be labs per my view point, but it certainly sounds like something that could be useful in general especially for esoteric or more complex projects, but I guess if that is what someone wanted to use \u201clabs space\u201d for, it fits the \u201cit\u2019s light, do what you want to do\u201d model or vision. I see it more of a place where I \u201cwant\u201d to do something, and even if others don\u2019t yet think it \u201cis\u201d or \u201cshould\u201d be an Apache project, I can at least exercise it, and possibly change some minds by way of real code and demonstration. So, I guess that could be the above too for some people.
>>
>>> Labs could also be the one with the strong Call to Action. I have
>>> search expertise for example (Apache Solr). I do a number of
>>> mini-projects around Solr that are not direct code contribution. I
>>> would be happy to step into other projects that are downstream from
>>> Solr and provide my Solr expertise to their committers by reviewing
>>> their setup or helping to explain to them why they have troubles
>>> migrating to latest Solr. But they don't really call and if they do
>>> call, most of the time, you are then expected to find your own path
>>> from the start to the level of contribution. If there was an umbrella
>>> of people helping to mentor people already in ASF into helping them to
>>> cross-contribute to other projects, this could be a lot easier. Labs
>>> could be one collecting such willing experts and connecting/enabling
>>> them.
>>>
>>> Could Labs be the place where people with different first language
>>> hang out and help to translate "Hello World" tutorials into other
>>> languages, using common infrastructure they don't have to reinvent.
>>> Discovery of educational resources for open-source projects is
>>> actually a big issue, giving a centralized space (basically a
>>> well-referenced blog) is a step in a right direction. Again, this
>>> could happen spontaneously by just individual efforts, but having a
>>> coordinated effort in removing all barriers towards that happening
>>> consistently and in repeated fashion, could encourage contributions.
>>>
>>> We already have http://community.apache.org/, which focuses on less
>>> technical aspects and on on-boarding (for those who find it, similar
>>> problem really....). Could Labs be complimentary to that, by focusing
>>> on technical aspects of building the community and focusing a lot more
>>> on getting more senior members of community to contribute back in in
>>> the mentoring ways?
>>>
>>
>> More of the same as what I wrote before for me, but I definitely don\u2019t think the above would be labs. To me labs should be something like:
>> https://github.com/awslabs <https://github.com/awslabs>
>>
>> Which are possibly ways of using technology or showing how to do it or totally concept projects which are not yet even trying to become proper projects where the cost of entry as a committer is super low simply because we are committers, and what we do there may even be throw away code. I wouldn\u2019t choose for labs to be about mentoring etc. To me that isn\u2019t innovation or experimental, but is more in line with learning the Apache way or something else depending on where that is going, and to me just seems like \u201csomething else\u201d from my point of view, but that\u2019s just me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Wade
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
Re: On Labs identity (Blue Sky thoughts)
Posted by Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com>.
On 13 March 2017 at 13:29, Danny Angus <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think this is great "... Labs being that inner space where different
> communities can meet. Ideally,
> it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
> different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
> projects."
>
> But I would see it more in terms of being the place where new projects
> are born, and cross project experiments are run.
>
"New projects are born" goes back to "Github vs this" and for me I
don't see the benefits of this. Nor did I see it about 9 months ago
when I become the committer and was looking at all the initiatives
including Labs.
Cross-project experiments sounds like more fun, but again, what makes
labs specifically more "cross-project enabling" than a generic code
repo?
Regards,
Alex.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
Re: On Labs identity (Blue Sky thoughts)
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
I think this is great "... Labs being that inner space where different
communities can meet. Ideally,
it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
projects."
But I would see it more in terms of being the place where new projects
are born, and cross project experiments are run.
d.
On 8 March 2017 at 01:54, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Mar 7, 2017, at 16:26, Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> (Just joined due to the Committer list's call to action).
>>
>
> Yes, I must say, I had not noticed the “Labs” link under “Innovation” at the bottom of the home page before, nor did I know about it. I am curious in success stories (or even past feedback on it), and too, how is this different than a current project possibly making a separate repository for something, and then later branching it off into a separate project at ASF?
>
>> I think the question of Lab's identity is where it fits in the
>> _modern_ ecosystem. Its original offering (VM, etc) as mentioned on
>> some of the messages in the archive is not sustainable.
>>
>> Github/Gitlab is more visible, offers more control and is integrated
>> more with additional awesome services, never mind being a
>> social-development destination.
>
> Would what you are saying here differ or does it differ from the same concept of repositories and mirror on GitHub as the rest of Apache? I think GitHub is certainly a perfect place to host repos, but it seems we do that now with mirroring etc, but we can’t just create repos there easily.
>
>> VMs are kind of cheap. I am putting a
>> lot more than $5/month into my Open Source Project of Choice. Running
>> a $5/month VM is just one of those things. And setting up VM with Labs
>> is probably as - or more - difficult than doing it on Digital Ocean or
>> whatever.
>>
>
> Maybe this is a different topic if we are talking about infrastructure. What infra would be provided or should be provided by Apache; even Apache Labs? I know there are some things that can be provided, but my understanding is internally that is fairly limited to some build tools, and occasionally project specific items such as a system to run a plugin portal or something specific to a project (negotiated or otherwise). I may be missing something, and will (re-)read the labs pages.
>
>> So, is Labs then a sub-project level of offering to Apache Committers?
>> Something that is smaller than a project but is still somehow
>> "Apache"? Again, that does not seem to be enough of an incentive for
>> technical reasons.
>>
>> What about for the community reasons? Can the identity be reformulated
>> (or reinforced) to be a lot more about community than about technical
>> offering? In fact, reading the By-laws, I get all warm and fuzzy and
>> excited, especially about the last part of the last para:
>> "Apache Labs are the place where ASF committers can work on
>> innovative, blue-sky and off-the-wall ideas, without having to worry
>> about fitting in an existing project bylaw or building a community
>> around it, but unlike other external venues that can offer similar
>> hosting services, as a place where fellow committers can offer
>> suggestions and help.”
>>
>
> To me that suggests the idea is to be lighter than incubator or dev proper, and to then allow committers a space to play in Apache, and get others involved, and then to possibly move items to the incubator and beyond, or not even. I like this interpretation a lot. People and committers can see what we are doing or possibly thinking about doing, and let’s ideas flow without having to have consensus first, but still has association with the organization.
>
>> So, if _I_ was interpreting these ByLaws, I would sort of focus them
>> inwards on a lot more dogfooding _across_ Apache projects with Labs
>> being that inner space where different communities can meet. Ideally,
>> it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
>> different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
>> projects.
>>
>> To take a semi-technical example, it would be great to have somebody
>> who has Technical Documentation skills, somebody who is good sysadmin
>> and somebody who has good technical/demo building skills and them
>> going around multiple Apache projects and helping them to build their
>> "hello world" examples that make it easier for the beginners to get
>> going. I bet after 3-5 runs through "take a project, build it, make a
>> basic dockerized example for it, push the examples and bugs discovered
>> back to the community", it will become an easy thing to do well. And
>> most communities would love it. And Labs could be the space that sets
>> up an infrastructure to help those people do it. Even if that
>> infrastructure is not actually running on Apache Infra.
>>
>
> I’m not sure that would be labs per my view point, but it certainly sounds like something that could be useful in general especially for esoteric or more complex projects, but I guess if that is what someone wanted to use “labs space” for, it fits the “it’s light, do what you want to do” model or vision. I see it more of a place where I “want” to do something, and even if others don’t yet think it “is” or “should” be an Apache project, I can at least exercise it, and possibly change some minds by way of real code and demonstration. So, I guess that could be the above too for some people.
>
>> Labs could also be the one with the strong Call to Action. I have
>> search expertise for example (Apache Solr). I do a number of
>> mini-projects around Solr that are not direct code contribution. I
>> would be happy to step into other projects that are downstream from
>> Solr and provide my Solr expertise to their committers by reviewing
>> their setup or helping to explain to them why they have troubles
>> migrating to latest Solr. But they don't really call and if they do
>> call, most of the time, you are then expected to find your own path
>> from the start to the level of contribution. If there was an umbrella
>> of people helping to mentor people already in ASF into helping them to
>> cross-contribute to other projects, this could be a lot easier. Labs
>> could be one collecting such willing experts and connecting/enabling
>> them.
>>
>> Could Labs be the place where people with different first language
>> hang out and help to translate "Hello World" tutorials into other
>> languages, using common infrastructure they don't have to reinvent.
>> Discovery of educational resources for open-source projects is
>> actually a big issue, giving a centralized space (basically a
>> well-referenced blog) is a step in a right direction. Again, this
>> could happen spontaneously by just individual efforts, but having a
>> coordinated effort in removing all barriers towards that happening
>> consistently and in repeated fashion, could encourage contributions.
>>
>> We already have http://community.apache.org/, which focuses on less
>> technical aspects and on on-boarding (for those who find it, similar
>> problem really....). Could Labs be complimentary to that, by focusing
>> on technical aspects of building the community and focusing a lot more
>> on getting more senior members of community to contribute back in in
>> the mentoring ways?
>>
>
> More of the same as what I wrote before for me, but I definitely don’t think the above would be labs. To me labs should be something like:
> https://github.com/awslabs <https://github.com/awslabs>
>
> Which are possibly ways of using technology or showing how to do it or totally concept projects which are not yet even trying to become proper projects where the cost of entry as a committer is super low simply because we are committers, and what we do there may even be throw away code. I wouldn’t choose for labs to be about mentoring etc. To me that isn’t innovation or experimental, but is more in line with learning the Apache way or something else depending on where that is going, and to me just seems like “something else” from my point of view, but that’s just me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wade
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
Re: On Labs identity (Blue Sky thoughts)
Posted by Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>.
> On Mar 7, 2017, at 16:26, Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (Just joined due to the Committer list's call to action).
>
Yes, I must say, I had not noticed the “Labs” link under “Innovation” at the bottom of the home page before, nor did I know about it. I am curious in success stories (or even past feedback on it), and too, how is this different than a current project possibly making a separate repository for something, and then later branching it off into a separate project at ASF?
> I think the question of Lab's identity is where it fits in the
> _modern_ ecosystem. Its original offering (VM, etc) as mentioned on
> some of the messages in the archive is not sustainable.
>
> Github/Gitlab is more visible, offers more control and is integrated
> more with additional awesome services, never mind being a
> social-development destination.
Would what you are saying here differ or does it differ from the same concept of repositories and mirror on GitHub as the rest of Apache? I think GitHub is certainly a perfect place to host repos, but it seems we do that now with mirroring etc, but we can’t just create repos there easily.
> VMs are kind of cheap. I am putting a
> lot more than $5/month into my Open Source Project of Choice. Running
> a $5/month VM is just one of those things. And setting up VM with Labs
> is probably as - or more - difficult than doing it on Digital Ocean or
> whatever.
>
Maybe this is a different topic if we are talking about infrastructure. What infra would be provided or should be provided by Apache; even Apache Labs? I know there are some things that can be provided, but my understanding is internally that is fairly limited to some build tools, and occasionally project specific items such as a system to run a plugin portal or something specific to a project (negotiated or otherwise). I may be missing something, and will (re-)read the labs pages.
> So, is Labs then a sub-project level of offering to Apache Committers?
> Something that is smaller than a project but is still somehow
> "Apache"? Again, that does not seem to be enough of an incentive for
> technical reasons.
>
> What about for the community reasons? Can the identity be reformulated
> (or reinforced) to be a lot more about community than about technical
> offering? In fact, reading the By-laws, I get all warm and fuzzy and
> excited, especially about the last part of the last para:
> "Apache Labs are the place where ASF committers can work on
> innovative, blue-sky and off-the-wall ideas, without having to worry
> about fitting in an existing project bylaw or building a community
> around it, but unlike other external venues that can offer similar
> hosting services, as a place where fellow committers can offer
> suggestions and help.”
>
To me that suggests the idea is to be lighter than incubator or dev proper, and to then allow committers a space to play in Apache, and get others involved, and then to possibly move items to the incubator and beyond, or not even. I like this interpretation a lot. People and committers can see what we are doing or possibly thinking about doing, and let’s ideas flow without having to have consensus first, but still has association with the organization.
> So, if _I_ was interpreting these ByLaws, I would sort of focus them
> inwards on a lot more dogfooding _across_ Apache projects with Labs
> being that inner space where different communities can meet. Ideally,
> it would give growth to tiger teams which brings together people from
> different projects who then, as a group, help out other Apache
> projects.
>
> To take a semi-technical example, it would be great to have somebody
> who has Technical Documentation skills, somebody who is good sysadmin
> and somebody who has good technical/demo building skills and them
> going around multiple Apache projects and helping them to build their
> "hello world" examples that make it easier for the beginners to get
> going. I bet after 3-5 runs through "take a project, build it, make a
> basic dockerized example for it, push the examples and bugs discovered
> back to the community", it will become an easy thing to do well. And
> most communities would love it. And Labs could be the space that sets
> up an infrastructure to help those people do it. Even if that
> infrastructure is not actually running on Apache Infra.
>
I’m not sure that would be labs per my view point, but it certainly sounds like something that could be useful in general especially for esoteric or more complex projects, but I guess if that is what someone wanted to use “labs space” for, it fits the “it’s light, do what you want to do” model or vision. I see it more of a place where I “want” to do something, and even if others don’t yet think it “is” or “should” be an Apache project, I can at least exercise it, and possibly change some minds by way of real code and demonstration. So, I guess that could be the above too for some people.
> Labs could also be the one with the strong Call to Action. I have
> search expertise for example (Apache Solr). I do a number of
> mini-projects around Solr that are not direct code contribution. I
> would be happy to step into other projects that are downstream from
> Solr and provide my Solr expertise to their committers by reviewing
> their setup or helping to explain to them why they have troubles
> migrating to latest Solr. But they don't really call and if they do
> call, most of the time, you are then expected to find your own path
> from the start to the level of contribution. If there was an umbrella
> of people helping to mentor people already in ASF into helping them to
> cross-contribute to other projects, this could be a lot easier. Labs
> could be one collecting such willing experts and connecting/enabling
> them.
>
> Could Labs be the place where people with different first language
> hang out and help to translate "Hello World" tutorials into other
> languages, using common infrastructure they don't have to reinvent.
> Discovery of educational resources for open-source projects is
> actually a big issue, giving a centralized space (basically a
> well-referenced blog) is a step in a right direction. Again, this
> could happen spontaneously by just individual efforts, but having a
> coordinated effort in removing all barriers towards that happening
> consistently and in repeated fashion, could encourage contributions.
>
> We already have http://community.apache.org/, which focuses on less
> technical aspects and on on-boarding (for those who find it, similar
> problem really....). Could Labs be complimentary to that, by focusing
> on technical aspects of building the community and focusing a lot more
> on getting more senior members of community to contribute back in in
> the mentoring ways?
>
More of the same as what I wrote before for me, but I definitely don’t think the above would be labs. To me labs should be something like:
https://github.com/awslabs <https://github.com/awslabs>
Which are possibly ways of using technology or showing how to do it or totally concept projects which are not yet even trying to become proper projects where the cost of entry as a committer is super low simply because we are committers, and what we do there may even be throw away code. I wouldn’t choose for labs to be about mentoring etc. To me that isn’t innovation or experimental, but is more in line with learning the Apache way or something else depending on where that is going, and to me just seems like “something else” from my point of view, but that’s just me.
Thanks,
Wade