incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Brockmeier <>
Subject Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and graduation
Date Mon, 02 Nov 2015 11:59:15 GMT
Hi all,

I'm one of the mentors of Sentry, which has been in incubation for some
time. The project has progressed in a number of ways, but my largest
concern is that the podling is doing [in my opinion] too much
development and discussion out-of-sight. 

I've raised issues about this, as has David Nalley. David had a
conversation with members of Sentry at ApacheCon Big Data in September,
and that discussion was brought back to the list. [1] 

Jiras are being filed, and swiftly acted on, in a way that strongly
suggests that a lot of discussion and direction of the project are
happening off-list and out-of-sight to the average participant. David
and myself have suggested ways that the community can remedy this, but
the most recent mail from Arvind indicates that he (and others in the
podling) don't feel it is a "valid ask." 

At this point, I'm raising this to general@ because I'd like second (and
third, etc.) opinions. Perhaps I'm deeply wrong, and others here feel
Sentry is ready to graduate. My feeling is that the podling is not
operating in "the Apache Way" and doesn't show a great deal of interest
in doing so. [2] To quote Arvind: 

"I feel another issue being pointed out or which has been eluded to in
the past is - who decides which Jiras should be fixed, what features to
create etc, specially when they show up as Jira issues directly with
patches that follow soon. It seems that in some ways the lack of using
mailing lists directly for discussion is linked to this behavior of
filing issues and fixing them rapidly, as if following a roadmap that
the community does not have control over. Please pardon me if my
interpretation/understanding of the issue is not right. But if it is
right, then I do want to say that - that too is not an issue in my
opinion at all. And here is why:

When someone files a Jira, they are inviting the entire community to
comment on it and provide feedback. If it is not in the interest of the
project, I do believe that responsible members of the community will be
quick to bring that out for discussion and even Veto it if necessary. If
that is not happening, it is not an issue with lack of community
participation, but rather it is an indicator of a project team that
knows where the gaps are and understands how to go about filling them

The model that Sentry is pursing may work very well *for the existing
members of the podling.* In my opinion, its process is entirely too
opaque to allow for interested parties outside of the existing podling
and companies interested in Sentry development to become involved. 

The podling is pressing to move to graduation, and I cannot in good
conscience vote +1 or even +0 at this point. I'm strongly -1 as a mentor
and don't feel the podling has any interest in working in "the Apache
Way" as commonly understood. [3]

However, I feel we've reached an impasse and there's little value in
continuing to debate amongst the mentors / podling. They've stated their
position(s) and I've stated mine. (I *think* David Nalley is in
agreement with me, but I don't wish to speak for him.) 

I'm bringing this to the IPMC fully understanding that I might be
totally wrong - maybe I'm holding to a too strict or outdated idea of
how projects should operate. I'm happy to be told so if that's the case
so I can improve as a mentor or decide to bow out from mentoring in the
future, if it's the case that my idea of a project is out-of-line with
the majority here.



Joe Brockmeier
Twitter: @jzb

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

View raw message