incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] NuttX Proposal
Date Wed, 27 Nov 2019 02:12:12 GMT
Thanks Justin and Greg. Let me explain more about the committer and
community related questions.

In the past there is only one commiter, who is Gregory Nutt, as you said,
the 'dictator' :) And this is just what we want to change by joining the
ASF. And why we choose ASF rather than other foundations like Linux
Foundation or SPI is because that, we think follow the Apache way can help
keeping the project and community healthy.

And on the opinion of the community for joining ASF, we have a slack
channel about how to set up the foundation(it is private...), not sure if
it is OK to post the message there out, but anyway, since this mailing list
is public, we can post this thread into the channel, and if there are
people who have concerns they can show up here. As Greg said, so far we
haven't heard about any objections, most are positive.

And on the initial committers, the plan is to invite more people during the
incubating time. In the past NuttX has some rules about the architecture,
coding, etc, but since there is only one committer, you do not need to tell
these rules to everyone as you can just reject the patch which break the
rules. As now we will give more people the commit permission, we want to
make sure that all the committers know the rules and want to follow the
rules.

https://bitbucket.org/nuttx/nuttx/src/master/INVIOLABLES.txt

So at the beginning we only added two people who are no doubt know the
rules and want to follow the rules as committers. Later when electing new
committers, we will make sure that they also know the rules and want to
follow the rules. Of course, if you think we'd better have more initial
committers, we could try to get more contributors in.

Thanks.

Gregory Nutt <spudaneco@gmail.com> 于2019年11月27日周三 上午8:49写道:

> Hi, Justin,
>
> It is good to meet you.  Thank you for taking the time to respond.
>
> - Apache has a no dictator rule (friendly or otherwise), given there’s a
> person who may be in that role currently in the project, are they fine
> with giving up control to the rest of the community?
>
> Yes, I am fine with giving up control.  I have been doing this for a
> very long time (probably daily for 15 years) and I am perfectly happy
> with others taking the lead.  So far all of the people who have been
> interested are of the highest technical caliber and I have complete
> confidence that they can share the leadership roles.
>
> - The contributors may need to sign ICLAs. Given the number of people
> involved and the age of the project, if this ia required, it might be
> difficult.
>
> Some of the files are so old that it may not be possible to even contact
> all of the authors.  I am the committer on all files and also listed as
> the author in the CM systems up to a few years ago (other people are
> given credit only in ChangeLogs and ReleaseNotes). Most have given
> copyright rights to me.  Is it the author, the committer, or the
> copyright holder that matters here?
>
> - Given the large number of committers, I expected the initial committer
> list to be much larger, have you considered inviting all of the major
> committers?
>
> No one but I can commit to the existing repositories so I am the
> committer of everything.  The names are not actually committers, but
> authors from the git commit --author= argument.  In the early years CVS
> and SVN were used and in the early GIT years, I did not yet know about
> the --author= option.  So you can clearly see when I discovered
> --author= in the data at:
>
> https://bitbucket.org/nuttx/nuttx/addon/bitbucket-graphs/graphs-repo-page#!graph=contributors&uuid=d90bf438-7869-4921-8926-fd25b0901043&type=c&group=weeks
> Maybe around 2015?
>
> - What does the community as a whole think abut this move? I can see
> this here [1], but I was a little surprised there wasn’t more public
> discussion about this. Is there consensus that they want to join the ASF
> and understand what that means?
>
> I have only heard positive things lately.  There was some grumbling
> about changing the licenses some time back, but I think we are past
> that. Many people had the mistaken impression that the Apache license in
> some way put more burden on the end-user.  The complexity of the
> language used in the license is a barrier to many people.
>
> - Is the community aware of some of the issues they may encounter in
> moving to ASF infrastructure and doing things in an Apache Way? (release
> process usually being the main difference).
>
> They are aware superficially but I don't think most appreciate the full
> implications.
>
> If there were not a full PMC supporting the project then it would be a
> problem for me as well.  With the PMC we should be able to share the
> load.  I have done 133 releases of NuttX alone.  I am hoping to be
> replaced with a more Apache-savvy release manager.  I would prefer to be
> this assistant, advisor / helper / mentor on most of the PMC issues.
>
> - I notice you mention BSD-4 cause in you list of licenses, this is
> actually Category X and not compatible with the ALv2 license. However
> if  it is what I think it is, it easy to work around (as we did for
> Mynewt).
>
> There are a few, very old 4-clause BSD files in the C library (leveraged
> from old, old BSD C library files).  Don't copyrights have a shelf life
> like patents?  I am sure that these are too old to be an issue because
> the copyrights have expired anyway.  This should be all of them:
>
>     $ find . -name *.c | xargs grep " California, Berkeley"
>     ./fs/nfs/rpc_clnt.c: * University of California, Berkeley and its
>     contributors. 4. Neither the
>     ./libs/libc/stdio/legacy_dtoa.c: *      California, Berkeley and its
>     contributors.
>     ./libs/libc/stdio/lib_libdtoa.c: *      California, Berkeley and its
>     contributors.
>     ./libs/libc/stdlib/lib_bsearch.c: *      California, Berkeley and
>     its contributors.
>     ./libs/libc/stdlib/lib_qsort.c: *    California, Berkeley and its
>     contributors.
>
>     $ find . -name *.h | xargs grep " California, Berkeley"
>     ./fs/nfs/rpc.h: *      California, Berkeley and its contributors.
>
> Six files.  That is basically just the RPC logic in NFS client and some
> pieces of the C library.  bsearch() and qsort() probably have
> replacements with other licenses.  dtoa() probably does not.
>
> If the proposal does come to the Incubator, (and the project thinks I'm
> a good fit), I can help out as a mentor. I‘m mentored a number of IoT
> projects here at Apache, including Mynewt.
>
> That is very good news!  Thank for that.
>
> I spoke with the Mynewt folk a couple of years back about incorporating
> some their IoT components into NuttX a few years back.  Licensing was an
> obstacle then, but times are changing.
>
> Greg
>
>
>

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