incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and graduation
Date Mon, 02 Nov 2015 12:45:51 GMT
Jira issues are (IMO) a bit too passive to be focal points for community

The *active* process of an email arriving in your inbox? Much better for
enabling community members to participate. And a uniform and easy way to do
so. Especially against the *transient* nature of Jira issues. If one gets
closed out quickly ("fixing them rapidly"), then discussion is effectively
shut down right then and there. That is not *inviting* discussion, but is
closing it down.

If you leave a Jira open for 72 hours, then it might be possible to argue
for inclusion. But the exact opposite seems to be occurring.

A mailing list allows any/all discussion to remain open. There is no
open/closed status associated with a particular topic.


On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Joe Brockmeier <> wrote:

> 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
> intuitively."
> 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.
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]
> Best,
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> Twitter: @jzb
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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