Cos, Did you mean this section?
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community John On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:41 PM Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > Besides, last time I checked there's no such thing as "diversity > requirement" > in the graduation. It is indeed being asked here and there, but so far it > isn't an official IPMC requirement. > > And I'd hate to make a "diversity scape-goat" out of the project that has > created a very welcome environment! > > Cos > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 02:14PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 11/07/2016 10:05 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: > > >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> > I was looking at Snoot, and some figures jumped at me. > > >>> > > > >>> > Is the Podling (and the IPMC) satisfied that there is no concern > with > > >>> > people affiliated with a single company providing more than 90% of > all > > >>> > commits over the past year and, as far as I can tell, the vast > majority > > >>> > of tickets and email, as well as a 73% stake in the proposed PMC? > > >>> > > > >>> > Is the IPMC satisfied that, should this company opt to not further > spend > > >>> > resources on this project, that the project would still be as > viable? > > >>> > > > >> Hi Daniel, > > >> > > >> I've observed this project since it joined the incubator and they've > worked > > >> hard to create an open and welcoming community and to fix all the > issues > > >> raised that could be barriers to their graduation. > > >> > > >> In terms of percentages, these things have been debated previously in > > >> graduation of projects such as Ignite, Flume, Tez etc and I'm not > going to > > >> repeat the arguments from those discussions. Geode would be better > with > > >> served with a wider community, but I think what matters is 1) have > they > > >> demonstrated the behaviors we expect and 2) are they moving in the > right > > >> direction. Geode is a great community and a pleasure to be involved > with > > >> and I would say yes to both of these. I believe they are going in the > right > > >> direction to make this project less dependent on one company and > except to > > >> change the percentages you've pointed out, theres no purpose left for > them > > >> being in the incubator. They've shown that they can manage themselves > and > > >> theres enough independent oversight to mitigate concerns which is why > I > > >> think we should vote for them to graduate. > > > > > > Given the discussions around single-vendor projects that are raging on > > > board@ I would have to agree with Daniel's concerns here. Projects > that > > > are heavily dominated by a single vendor/company/organization > > > historically cause problems over time. > > > > I think that other discussion addresses a very different set of problems. > > > > > Is there a huge rush to get this project graduated? > > > > I'd rather flip your argument around and say: at this point sitting in > the > > Incubator adds no value to the project nor does it teach anything > > new or useful to its PPMC or a community at large. > > > > > Surely we serve the > > > Foundation, and this project, better, by ensuring that this problem > > > (and, yes, it's a problem) is addressed before we grant them TLP > status? > > > > I disagree. The Incubator is a place to make sure that the community > > (regardless of its composition) truly understands and practices the > > "Apache Way". As has been suggested on this thread by a number of > > votes from project's mentors and IPMC members embedded in the > > Geode community that mission has been accomplished. > > > > I see no reason to hold the project hostage over the diversity > requirement > > simply because it is pointless for IPMC, project and the foundation. > > > > > I'm personally less concerned with the sustainability of the project > > > should the company opt out of working on the project, and more > concerned > > > with the kind of monoculture "we own it" problems that we're starting > to > > > see crop up in other projects that were allowed to graduate without > > > building the community first. > > > > Then you really should be voting "yes" on this thread. There's a good > number > > of us on IPMC who believe that "we own it" is really not a problem with > this > > community. > > > > Thanks, > > Roman. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
