Hi - Top posting. These are all excellent reasons to remain separate.
Best Regards, Dave > On Jul 5, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:52 PM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> Hi Josh, >> >> I have some questions: >> >>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> As a mentor, I consciously avoided an explicit "+1" until we got some >> IPMC discussion. Let me expand: >>> >>> The current members of Fluo are great, get the Apache Way, and are >> self-sufficient. I have no concerns over them operating as a TLP -- I think >> they are ready. However, they have only added a single committer and I see >> none in the pipeline -- Fluo is defined by the current committers. >> >> (1) Seems to be a niche project as you state below which is just within >> the range of 5 contributors. Am I wrong? >> >>> My hesitation is balancing the Incubators goal of "pushing podlings to >> graduate" and ensuring adequate diversity in the podling. This is >> especially difficult for Fluo as they're "niche on niche" (it's a difficult >> dist-sys problem/software, and not many people use the tech they're >> building on top of given my view of the world). >>> >>> I realize that this discussion could easily spiral out of control, >> turning into some meta-discussion about Incubator goals. I want to avoid >> that. >>> >>> I'm looking for some feelings from other IPMC folks about how to >> approach the Fluo podling given their specific circumstances. If other >> people are also hesitant, I would also be interested in suggestions about >> what we would concretely change (because I don't know what to suggest that >> "fix" the diversity issue for them that isn't changing the core of their >> project). If people aren't worried, I'm happy to give an explicit +1. >> >> (2) Has any consideration been given to becoming a project within >> Accumulo? Or are the goals of Fluo distinct from and not wholly dependent >> on Accumulo? >> >> > I'd like to answer this number (2): This possibility was mentioned by me > after one of our previous status reports as a discussion I'd like to have > on the list. However, I never raised it again on the list to formally > discuss. There's a few potential reasons why I now think that might not > work well, and why I never brought it up again (and probably why nobody > raised it with the Accumulo PMC): > > 1. The committers do overlap (all but one Fluo PPMC/committer is also an > Accumulo PMC/committer), but Accumulo's PMC is much larger than Fluo's > PPMC. It would not make sense for the Fluo PPMC to grant majority control > to an Accumulo PMC which does not necessarily share the consensus direction > that Fluo is headed. I'm sure Fluo would be happy to incrementally onboard > Accumulo developers as they began participating in Fluo development, but > bringing them in without vetting their merits from the Fluo team's > perspective seems like a bad idea. The Fluo team would probably prefer > decide on the merits of new committers/PMC based on their contributions to > Fluo, rather than automatically inherit any committers from another project. > > 2. While Fluo is currently implemented on Accumulo, it is not necessarily > the intent for it to remain this way. Under an Accumulo PMC, it is likely > this coupling would solidify, rather than be abstracted. When Fluo was > proposed to the incubator, it was mentioned that we'd be willing to accept > contributions to expand Fluo's feature set so that it works on other > databases. The proposed TLP resolution reflects this willingness to expand > beyond Accumulo by not mentioning Accumulo in its mission statement. > > 3. Accumulo uses a JIRA-based workflow with pull requests on GitHub and > C-T-R. Fluo is using GitBox with R-T-C. The workflows are very different. > Accumulo's existing bylaws explicitly contradict Fluo's own workflow that > the developers seem comfortable with. > > 4. Speaking as an Accumulo PMC member, I don't know that I'd want to set a > precedence for accepting Accumulo-related projects as subprojects of > Accumulo, simply because it can be a bit of scope creep for Accumulo. The > Accumulo PMC has already been approached to accept several other extensions > to Accumulo as subprojects from "drive-by" sources who (from appearances) > simply want to offload the maintenance work without community > participation. I can't speak for the rest of the Accumulo PMC, but it seems > preferable to me that the Accumulo PMC protect itself from such DOA code > dumps by leaning towards resisting subprojects (though, having gone through > Incubation can be proof that the code is not going to be DOA). Speaking as > a Fluo PPMC member, I would not want to burden the Accumulo PMC with the > responsibility to regularly evaluate whether to accept bulk code as > subprojects, by opening those flood gates and distracting the PMC from its > primary responsibilities to its existing code. > > > >> (3) Corollary - it seems a large number of Fluo Initial Committers were >> also Accumulo PMC. (I not intentionally rehashing any prior conversation.) >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> >>> >>> - Josh >>> >>> On 7/3/17 4:15 PM, John D. Ament wrote: >>>> Hi Christopher, >>>> Thanks for the heads up. A few nits on my part, but overall I would be >>>> happy to see Fluo graduate. When reading my notes, please also consult >> the >>>> graduation guide at [1]. >>>> - The discussion and vote should have happened on your public dev list, >> not >>>> private. It's good that at least discussion happened publicly, and the >>>> actual vote isn't required so it's not a big deal. >>>> - I don't see any sign that you added new committers or PPMC members >> since >>>> incubating. See also [2]. I don't see that as a show stopper, as it >> looks >>>> like a diverse group. >>>> - Of the proposed PMC, how many are actively committing to Fluo? Was >> there >>>> an ask at any point to see who was still interested? >>>> - Only one mentor voted on the graduation. Would be great to see if the >>>> other mentors are equally on board. >>>> John >>>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel >>>> [2]: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Fluo >>>> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> Greetings Incubator, >>>>> >>>>> The Fluo podling has decided to pursue graduation to a TLP. The result >> of >>>>> the internal PPMC vote is at [1] (apologies that it occurred on our >> private >>>>> list instead of on our dev list; the discuss thread [2] which preceded >> it >>>>> did occur on the dev list). Our podling status page has recently been >>>>> updated and can be found here[3]. >>>>> >>>>> Below, you can view the proposed TLP resolution which we'd like to >> present >>>>> to the board with the support of the IPMC, after sufficient discussion >> here >>>>> and subsequent IPMC vote. >>>>> >>>>> [1]: >>>>> >>>>> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a9de260fcd14b184ae7a8b725e348e13ee4ad10e3057a6a404732c@%3Cprivate.fluo.apache.org%3E >>>>> [2]: >>>>> >>>>> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3164d77ea18c3e36ce215ab4a07b2cb80cf9c49c2503ef5d1defbdde@%3Cdev.fluo.apache.org%3E >>>>> [3]: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/fluo >>>>> >>>>> ********** >>>>> Establish the Apache Fluo Project >>>>> >>>>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of >>>>> the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to >> establish >>>>> a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and >> maintenance >>>>> of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public, >>>>> related to the storage and incremental processing of large data sets. >>>>> >>>>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee >>>>> (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Fluo Project", be and hereby is >>>>> established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further >>>>> >>>>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is responsible for >>>>> the creation and maintenance of software related to the storage and >>>>> incremental processing of large data sets; and be it further >>>>> >>>>> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Fluo" be and >> hereby >>>>> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of >>>>> the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Fluo Project, and to >>>>> have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the >>>>> scope of responsibility of the Apache Fluo Project; and be it further >>>>> >>>>> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are >>>>> appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Fluo Project: >>>>> >>>>> * Billie Rinaldi <bil...@apache.org> >>>>> * Chris McTague <cjmcta...@apache.org> >>>>> * Christopher Tubbs <ctubb...@apache.org> >>>>> * Corey J. Nolet <cjno...@apache.org> >>>>> * Drew Farris <d...@apache.org> >>>>> * Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> >>>>> * Keith Turner <ktur...@apache.org> >>>>> * Mike Walch <mwa...@apache.org> >>>>> >>>>> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Keith Turner be appointed >>>>> to the office of Vice President, Apache Fluo, to serve in accordance >>>>> with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the >>>>> Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal >>>>> or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it >>>>> further >>>>> >>>>> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Fluo PMC be and hereby is tasked with >>>>> the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development >>>>> and increased participation in the Apache Fluo Project; and be it >>>>> further >>>>> >>>>> RESOLVED, that the Apache Fluo Project be and hereby is tasked with the >>>>> migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Fluo podling; and >>>>> be it further >>>>> >>>>> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator >>>>> Fluo podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter >>>>> discharged. >>>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
