Re: [VOTE] Move Flume to dormant
Hi Christian, On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 at 21:30, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Please vote: > > [] +1, label Flume as dormant > [] -1, don't label Flume as dormant because... +1, label Flume as dormant Honestly I have a lot of work on Log4j and I can not spare time to even release Flume. I did try to introduce our automated release process in [1], but there are some rough edges in Flume I can not solve alone (some class explicitly non reproducible, which contains data like the user that built Flume). The PR has been waiting for a review for more than 7 months. Piotr [1] https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/pull/419
Re: [VOTE] Move Flume to dormant
-1 Ralph > On Oct 3, 2024, at 4:00 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > > Hi Christian, > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 at 21:30, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >> Please vote: >> >> [] +1, label Flume as dormant >> [] -1, don't label Flume as dormant because... > > +1, label Flume as dormant > > Honestly I have a lot of work on Log4j and I can not spare time to > even release Flume. I did try to introduce our automated release > process in [1], but there are some rough edges in Flume I can not > solve alone (some class explicitly non reproducible, which contains > data like the user that built Flume). The PR has been waiting for a > review for more than 7 months. > > Piotr > > [1] https://github.com/apache/logging-flume/pull/419
Re: [VOTE] Move Flume to dormant
FWIW, I don't think apache voting guidelines allow for "you can only vote a certain way only if ..." Gary On Wed, Oct 2, 2024, 3:30 PM Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hello everyone, > > We have discussed this in the past. I hope we can pick up a decent dev > speed with Flume after we adopt it. I don't regret moving it into Logging > Services, but we have not seen any significant movement. > > This message (private, please don't quote from it), on the other hand, is > significant: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/b6ndsy30j239s3fw0o2tqwm9cwmv3801 > > I want to call a vote to move Flume to dormant. Dormant means only it > receives the Dormant label, and we move it to the dormant tab on our main > website. This will give our users the correct information that we are *not* > actively maintaining Flume. Dormant does not mean we are dropping it. > Whenever PMC members or committers want to work on it, they can; when we > see significant movement on the sub-project, we can label it as active. > > As I see it now, there is no active oversight or development. We, Logging > Services, consider this dormant. For transparency and risk assessment, we > need to be open about this status. > > Please vote: > > [] +1, label Flume as dormant > [] -1, don't label Flume as dormant because... > > Please consider voting ONLY -1, if: > > - you are willing to reply to the message linked above within the next 72 > hours with helpful information (the usual timeframe to respond) > - AND you are willing to maintain this project in the next few months, > which means upgrading dependencies, taking care of security, and -at least- > acknowledging bug reports and responding to them > - AND you are willing to check, validate, and vote on a new release if it > happens > > I would like to highlight that we are not changing code here; to me, this > is a procedural vote. Since we need three PMC members to maintain a > release, I consider this project active if at least three PMC members > commit to the above. > > Kind regards > Christian > > -- > The Apache Software Foundation > V.P., Data Privacy >
Re: [VOTE] Move Flume to dormant
+1 Op wo 2 okt 2024 om 21:30 schreef Christian Grobmeier > Hello everyone, > > We have discussed this in the past. I hope we can pick up a decent dev > speed with Flume after we adopt it. I don't regret moving it into Logging > Services, but we have not seen any significant movement. > > This message (private, please don't quote from it), on the other hand, is > significant: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/b6ndsy30j239s3fw0o2tqwm9cwmv3801 > > I want to call a vote to move Flume to dormant. Dormant means only it > receives the Dormant label, and we move it to the dormant tab on our main > website. This will give our users the correct information that we are *not* > actively maintaining Flume. Dormant does not mean we are dropping it. > Whenever PMC members or committers want to work on it, they can; when we > see significant movement on the sub-project, we can label it as active. > > As I see it now, there is no active oversight or development. We, Logging > Services, consider this dormant. For transparency and risk assessment, we > need to be open about this status. > > Please vote: > > [] +1, label Flume as dormant > [] -1, don't label Flume as dormant because... > > Please consider voting ONLY -1, if: > > - you are willing to reply to the message linked above within the next 72 > hours with helpful information (the usual timeframe to respond) > - AND you are willing to maintain this project in the next few months, > which means upgrading dependencies, taking care of security, and -at least- > acknowledging bug reports and responding to them > - AND you are willing to check, validate, and vote on a new release if it > happens > > I would like to highlight that we are not changing code here; to me, this > is a procedural vote. Since we need three PMC members to maintain a > release, I consider this project active if at least three PMC members > commit to the above. > > Kind regards > Christian > > -- > The Apache Software Foundation > V.P., Data Privacy >
Re: [VOTE] Move Flume to dormant
On Thu, Oct 3, 2024, at 18:10, Gary Gregory wrote: > FWIW, I don't think apache voting guidelines allow for "you can only vote a > certain way only if ..." That's why I wrote: "Please CONSIDER voting ONLY -1, if:" Cheers, Christian > > Gary > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2024, 3:30 PM Christian Grobmeier > wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> We have discussed this in the past. I hope we can pick up a decent dev >> speed with Flume after we adopt it. I don't regret moving it into Logging >> Services, but we have not seen any significant movement. >> >> This message (private, please don't quote from it), on the other hand, is >> significant: >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/b6ndsy30j239s3fw0o2tqwm9cwmv3801 >> >> I want to call a vote to move Flume to dormant. Dormant means only it >> receives the Dormant label, and we move it to the dormant tab on our main >> website. This will give our users the correct information that we are *not* >> actively maintaining Flume. Dormant does not mean we are dropping it. >> Whenever PMC members or committers want to work on it, they can; when we >> see significant movement on the sub-project, we can label it as active. >> >> As I see it now, there is no active oversight or development. We, Logging >> Services, consider this dormant. For transparency and risk assessment, we >> need to be open about this status. >> >> Please vote: >> >> [] +1, label Flume as dormant >> [] -1, don't label Flume as dormant because... >> >> Please consider voting ONLY -1, if: >> >> - you are willing to reply to the message linked above within the next 72 >> hours with helpful information (the usual timeframe to respond) >> - AND you are willing to maintain this project in the next few months, >> which means upgrading dependencies, taking care of security, and -at least- >> acknowledging bug reports and responding to them >> - AND you are willing to check, validate, and vote on a new release if it >> happens >> >> I would like to highlight that we are not changing code here; to me, this >> is a procedural vote. Since we need three PMC members to maintain a >> release, I consider this project active if at least three PMC members >> commit to the above. >> >> Kind regards >> Christian >> >> -- >> The Apache Software Foundation >> V.P., Data Privacy >>
Re: [VOTE] Move Flume to dormant
+1 On 2 October 2024 21:29:44 CEST, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >Hello everyone, > >We have discussed this in the past. I hope we can pick up a decent dev speed >with Flume after we adopt it. I don't regret moving it into Logging Services, >but we have not seen any significant movement. > >This message (private, please don't quote from it), on the other hand, is >significant: >https://lists.apache.org/thread/b6ndsy30j239s3fw0o2tqwm9cwmv3801 > >I want to call a vote to move Flume to dormant. Dormant means only it receives >the Dormant label, and we move it to the dormant tab on our main website. This >will give our users the correct information that we are *not* actively >maintaining Flume. Dormant does not mean we are dropping it. Whenever PMC >members or committers want to work on it, they can; when we see significant >movement on the sub-project, we can label it as active. > >As I see it now, there is no active oversight or development. We, Logging >Services, consider this dormant. For transparency and risk assessment, we need >to be open about this status. > >Please vote: > >[] +1, label Flume as dormant >[] -1, don't label Flume as dormant because... > >Please consider voting ONLY -1, if: > > - you are willing to reply to the message linked above within the next 72 > hours with helpful information (the usual timeframe to respond) > - AND you are willing to maintain this project in the next few months, which > means upgrading dependencies, taking care of security, and -at least- > acknowledging bug reports and responding to them > - AND you are willing to check, validate, and vote on a new release if it > happens > >I would like to highlight that we are not changing code here; to me, this is a >procedural vote. Since we need three PMC members to maintain a release, I >consider this project active if at least three PMC members commit to the above. > >Kind regards >Christian > >-- >The Apache Software Foundation >V.P., Data Privacy Jan
