incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Grobmeier <>
Subject Re: What constitute a successful project?
Date Mon, 26 Nov 2012 18:43:47 GMT

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Alan Cabrera <> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 12:57 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> Actually there is activity. Only in September 2 new committers joined.
>> Looking at SVN, there is activity too:
>> Unfortunately the most active committer - if not the only one - is Eric.
>> For me (others may correct me) a successful incubator project is one
>> which manages to build up a community around it. While it seems that
>> Chukwa aims at it:
>> the project has not managed to get a momentum.
>> On the other hand, I saw in the private archives that some legal
>> restrictions have been resolved.
>> Question:
>> How does the Chukwa project want to build up a new community?
>> Personally - if there is a plan and interest to make community work
>> (however that looks like) - I would be open to leave Chukwa a little
>> longer in incubation. Esp. because it seems that committers can now
>> work more freely on it.
>> Maybe we can make up some kind of deadline?
> Seven months ago we had this same discussion when I joined as a mentor.  There was not
a lot of activity other than Eric and I raised concerns about maybe it was time to retire
the project.  A variety of excuses were offered up and it was decided to wait a while and
hope that the community activity would grow.
> We even added a few committers a "bit early" with the hopes that they would infuse the
project with more energy.
> IMO, not much changed.  The flurry of activity is from Eric every time a discussion about
retirement arises.
> As for the "now that committers can work more freely on it" is not exactly clear. My
understanding is that there were some patches developed at IBM and those patches are now going
through legal.  I tried to dig deeper into what exactly was being held up and all I received
was equivocation.
> Even by the PPMC's comments they obliquely acknowledge that there's not much activity
and expressed an interested in simply keeping it around with the hopes that something would
happen; there were no concrete ideas or plans on how to grow the community because, by their
own admission, no one has the time to work much on the project.  I replied "To be sure, the
infrastructure and administrative costs are negligible.  So, we don't need to worry on that
account.  However, the ASF Incubator is not a place where you can hang your shingle up and
hope that someday someone will wander by and be interested. "  Chukwa has been in the Incubator
for years now.
> Maybe that's what we want the Incubator to be.  If that's the case then let's make this
new policy explicit.  Until then, I will follow my understanding that a project cannot just
simply park itself in the Incubator hoping for the party to arrive.

Thank you for clarifying. It's good to read a summary of a Mentor.
Actually I think you understand the Incubator as I do and what I have
read in your mail it makes sense to end incubation. As Ted Dunning
said: retiring != death. GitHub might make more sense. When the
project got more community it can come try to come back to the


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message