incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From nup...@ingeniumsys.com
Subject Re: Concerted Proposal
Date Mon, 05 Oct 2015 08:51:01 GMT
As a member of Concerted community, I believe that acceptance into ASF 
Incubator is beneficial for Concerted especially in terms of community 
support. Being an independent project on github really does not help 
when we want to build a healthy community of people interested in 
Concerted and aiming to take Concerted to ultimate goal we have i.e. 
being the primary in memory support framework for big data engines. I 
really feel that bootstrapping the existing code base and community into 
ASF will generate much more interest, visibility and allow the community 
to be regulated in a much better manner.

Also, I agree with Atri on the fact that since our eventual goal is to 
be supporting existing big data projects, working with them early on is 
a great way to improve our roadmap and get contributions from those 
projects.

As a person who has been revamping Concerted code base for a while now, 
I believe that the existing code base is a great place to pick up the 
main development of Concerted.

Nupur

On 05/10/2015 02:09 PM, Atri Sharma wrote:
> While I do not disagree with the fact that the code base can evolve at
> github, the situation here is a bit different. Preliminary though it 
> is,
> Concerted does have an existing code base. The bigger question is 
> having
> the code base evolve at a higher frequency with a wider community.
> 
> I think that if Concerted becomes a part of ASF Incubator, it has a 
> much
> higher chance of evolving into a wider product with a much better 
> alignment
> with the existing Apache big data ecosystem. Concerted provides the 
> ability
> to DIY big data in memory support engines, with a high degree of custom
> building for each user project.
> 
> The reason why Concerted is proposed to become part of ASF Incubator is
> that Concerted is a small project right now, with a roadmap and a set 
> of
> developers. Getting into ASF allows the Concerted project to have much
> better visibility with existing big data projects, which will then 
> allow
> Concerted to be developed with more goals in mind. Please note that
> eventual goal of Concerted is to be supporting existing big data 
> engines
> with on demand custom in memory support. Since the primary target is 
> Apache
> big data space, I think it makes sense to be bootstrapping into ASF 
> early
> on.
> 
> Second, ASF will allow Concerted to have better community support and
> management. As mentioned earlier, visibility and integration with other 
> ASF
> projects will allow those projects to contribute to Concerted if they 
> want
> to mold it. Also, being a part of ASF anyways helps build community and
> manage it in a much better manner.
> 
> I think Roman put it aptly when he mentioned Apache Drill. I think 
> Apache
> Drill came to ASF Incubator with a goal and a community, and Concerted
> comes with the same goal. We already have a small community of active
> people, and who are excited at prospect of joining the Incubator.
> 
> Please also note that Concerted does not aim to become a large project 
> like
> Apache Spark (although that might change with time). Community current 
> aims
> are to become a lightweight in memory support engine building 
> framework,
> with a small but well managed community and code base. So, the existing
> code base might actually be a great starting point for us to be
> bootstrapped into ASF Incubator, build community and build the existing
> framework into a much more mature project dedicated at supporting ASF 
> big
> data projects.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Atri
> 
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Sergio Fernández <wikier@apache.org> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Well, I think what we should ask ourselves is if this is actually the 
>> role
>> of ASF incubation. FMPOV the project will evolve much easier at 
>> github, and
>> once the code base becomes a reality we can help mentoring the project 
>> in
>> the Apache way. But this is just my personal opinion.
>> 
>> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> It looks like there is plenty of mentor-power left on the project. I 
>>> don't
>>> see why one mentor dropping out from a good and large group is a 
>>> problem.
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <rvs@apache.org> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > Hi!
>>> >
>>> > as some of you know, Atri and I have been
>>> > discussing his Concerted Proposal lately:
>>> >    https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ConcertedProposal
>>> >
>>> > At this point I can no longer offer my mentorship
>>> > services (I ended up quite overloaded as it is)
>>> > and I feel it is only fair to Atri if I ask for help here.
>>> >
>>> > Consider this thread a pre-DICUSS. Concerted isn't
>>> > what most of the Incubator proposals are these days.
>>> > It is much more about promise of technology rather
>>> > than something that exists today. In this it reminds
>>> > me of Drill a great deal when it just got proposed -- mostly
>>> > and idea. Not much of an existing code base or product.
>>> >
>>> > So I guess what I'm asking is an IPMC opinion on
>>> > how to proceed with this given the mentor situation
>>> > and the state of technology.
>>> >
>>> > Please help by chiming in.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Roman.
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Sergio Fernández
>> Partner Technology Manager
>> Redlink GmbH
>> m: +43 6602747925
>> e: sergio.fernandez@redlink.co
>> w: http://redlink.co
>> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message