On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 11/08/2016 11:14 PM, 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. > > If it turns the project into a more diverse/dispersed community, I'd say > that's added value. We can argue all night whether that's up to the > IPMC, the project or the board to figure out, I'm not sure we'll agree > there :) > > > > >> 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. > > Except it's not pointless for the foundation, we've seen that. we're > seeing that right now with several projects that either die completely > or take a very wrong turn because someone higher up the food chain > thinks otherwise about the project(s), and that also hurts the > foundation - let's not pretend that never happens. I can't say whether > this would be true for Geode (how would I know?), but a 96+% chunk of > all contributions coming from people affiliated with a single company is > worrisome to me. > > > > >> 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. > > I'd say Rich should vote what he feels is right, not what "a good number > of us" think is right. That's not how consensus works. > > You'll notice that I haven't just said "-1, I don't like it". But I also > haven't heard any compelling arguments as to why this isn't a problem, > save a "we're sure it's not a problem" reply. > > If I were to look purely at contributions to the codebase, there is no > indication that this issue is at all being worked on, on the contrary, > if you look at contributions over time, the percentage that is purely > pivotal keeps going up and up, and now sits at >96% in the past 6 months. > > Voting in new committers is one thing, but if it doesn't lead to some > sort of dispersion of who has a deciding role in the project, then I > don't believe the current strategy is working. > > Furthermore, there is little to no recognition that this is even a > potential issue. I'd love to see people at least *acknowledging* that > this is something they have to work on, that'll give us something > tangible to relate to when deciding on a vote. > Perhaps you could re-read my first post, because I believe did acknowledge it. Niall > > > > 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 > >
