incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martijn Dashorst <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2016 23:12:27 GMT
And here as well, with the precise specification of at a minimum 3
independent committers:

> The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally
independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success
of the project)


On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Daniel Gruno <> wrote:
> On 11/08/2016 11:43 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
>> Besides, last time I checked there's no such thing as "diversity requirement"
>> in the graduation.  It is indeed being asked here and there, but so far it
>> isn't an official IPMC requirement.
> It's very prominently displayed in our graduation guideline.
>> And I'd hate to make a "diversity scape-goat" out of the project that has
>> created a very welcome environment!
>> Cos
>> On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 02:14PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rich Bowen <> wrote:
>>>> On 11/07/2016 10:05 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Gruno <>
>>>>>>> I was looking at Snoot, and some figures jumped at me.
>>>>>>> Is the Podling (and the IPMC) satisfied that there is no concern
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> of tickets and email, as well as a 73% stake in the proposed
>>>>>>> Is the IPMC satisfied that, should this company opt to not further
>>>>>>> resources on this project, that the project would still be as
>>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>>> I've observed this project since it joined the incubator and they've
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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
>>>>> direction to make this project less dependent on one company and except
>>>>> change the percentages you've pointed out, theres no purpose left for
>>>>> being in the incubator. They've shown that they can manage themselves
>>>>> theres enough independent oversight to mitigate concerns which is why
>>>>> 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.
>>>> 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.
>>>> 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.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roman.
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:

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

View raw message