incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Beam podling graduation readiness
Date Thu, 08 Dec 2016 23:34:51 GMT
Since the discussion seems to have concluded and the formal vote has passed
unanimously [1], I'll submit the draft resolution to the Board for their
consideration (per graduation guide [2]).

Thanks everyone!

[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/71a1c63837a7d1506a10af9c70af1c24db988451ac5b53fa2467b9b8@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
[2]
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Davor Bonaci <davor@apache.org> wrote:

> Since it seems we have a consensus, I'm going to start a formal vote.
>
> Please keep the discussion going, and vote only after you feel ready.
> (Regardless of the outcome, we’d love to hear specific feedback on what can
> be improved going forward.)
>
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Sergio Fernández <wikier@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Out of personal technical interests, I've been following the podling quite
>> close.
>> They have made en enormous effort, both on the technical and community
>> sides.
>> I strongly believe the project is ready for graduation.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Davor Bonaci <davor@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi everyone,
>> > Apache Beam entered incubation in early February. Over the past 10
>> months,
>> > the podling has made great progress across various areas: refactoring
>> the
>> > project to remove any special treatment given to a runner or a vendor,
>> > building processes that encourage open development, evangelizing the
>> > project, and growing the community.
>> >
>> > Now, with the support of our mentors and overwhelming support from the
>> > wider Beam community [1], I’d like start a discussion on the progress we
>> > have made and a possible graduation recommendation as a new top-level
>> > project.
>> >
>> > To prepare for the discussion, we have published our self-assessment [2]
>> > against the Apache Maturity Model. We tried to include links and
>> evidence
>> > whenever applicable. I’ll summarize the commonly asked questions here,
>> but
>> > please see the self-assessment for additional information, various
>> details,
>> > graphs, evidence, etc.
>> >
>> > > Releases?
>> >
>> > Three -- all unanimously approved, all driven by different release
>> > managers, across different organizations. A detailed release guide is
>> > available on the website.
>> >
>> > > Community growth?
>> >
>> > There has been a clear growth month-over-month. We have had 1500+ pull
>> > requests on GitHub and 110+ individual code contributors. In terms of
>> > mailing list activity, over the past 30 days, we have had 50+ individual
>> > participants on dev@ and 35+ on user@.
>> >
>> > > Organizational influence?
>> >
>> > We have worked hard to remove any special treatment given to any
>> > organization. The bulk of the initial code donation came from Google,
>> but
>> > now both the project’s code and branding have a clean separation between
>> > the project and Google Cloud Dataflow (which has become just one of many
>> > runners that can be used within Beam).
>> >
>> > While it is true that Googlers continue to provide the majority of
>> commits,
>> > over the last three months no single organization has had more than
>> ~50% of
>> > unique monthly contributors. (Please see the graph in the
>> self-assessment.)
>> > Diverse influences are also particularly clear when you look across
>> modules
>> > within the project. Beam has about ~22 large modules in the codebase, at
>> > least 10 modules have been developed with little to no contribution from
>> > Googlers.
>> >
>> > Now, if we were to graduate, the Beam PPMC recommends the following
>> > information for the Board resolution:
>> >     * Project name: Apache Beam
>> >     * Project description and scope: a unified programming model for
>> both
>> > batch and streaming data processing, enabling efficient execution across
>> > diverse distributed execution engines and providing extensibility points
>> > for connecting to different technologies and user communities.
>> >     * PMC composition:
>> >          * Tyler Akidau <takidau@apache.org>
>> >          * Davor Bonaci <davor@apache.org>
>> >          * Robert Bradshaw <robertwb@apache.org>
>> >          * Ben Chambers <bchambers@apache.org>
>> >          * Luke Cwik <lcwik@apache.org>
>> >          * Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>
>> >          * Dan Halperin <dhalperi@apache.org>
>> >          * Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org>
>> >          * Aljoscha Krettek <aljoscha@apache.org>
>> >          * Maximilian Michels <mxm@apache.org>
>> >          * Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jbonofre@apache.org>
>> >          * Frances Perry <frances@apache.org>
>> >          * Amit Sela <amitsela@apache.org>
>> >          * Josh Wills <jwills@apache.org>
>> > (The ratification of the full text of the draft resolution is nearing
>> > completion.)
>> >
>> > While we have made great progress across the board (thanks to so many of
>> > you in this community), I’m sure there’s still plenty to do. We
>> continue to
>> > be focused on community growth, and processes that encourage open
>> > development. Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, we’d love to
>> get
>> > specific feedback on what can be improved going forward.
>> >
>> > Any thoughts, comments, questions or concerns? Thank you.
>> >
>> > Davor
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f133fb6bf2d1851d1bd5880c772e4b
>> > 050700154fa178fdb00a5b66bf@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > [2] http://beam.incubator.apache.org/contribute/maturity-model/
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sergio Fernández
>> Partner Technology Manager
>> Redlink GmbH
>> m: +43 6602747925
>> e: sergio.fernandez@redlink.co
>> w: http://redlink.co
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message