incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: The state of Sirona
Date Mon, 17 Apr 2017 02:56:51 GMT
+1 for retirement.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a podling returning to the place from whence it came.
I'm encouraged that that sentiment seems to be proliferating among the IPMC.

-Taylor







> On Apr 16, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Sounds like consensus is coming together, then. Sound right?
> 
> 
>> On Apr 16, 2017 06:03, "larry mccay" <lmccay@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hmmmm - interesting points about incubator vs github and overhead.
>> I do think my statement was unclear though.
>> 
>> I was saying exactly the same thing about struggling podlings.
>> Much better to find out in the incubator than as a TLP that the apache way
>> isn't really going to work for them at the moment.
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:21 AM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 3:04 PM larry mccay <lmccay@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Well said.
>>>> It is healthy to not have a podling graduate and subsequently struggle
>>> as a
>>>> TLP.
>>>> This is actually a success of sorts.
>>>> 
>>>> At least until a majority of podlings have trouble. :)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> I may be reading Ted's email differently.  Or I might be reading your
>>> response wrong.
>>> 
>>> Retirement isn't a failure.  Podlings are meant to be experiments in some
>>> cases.  Can I build a strong enough community, can we follow the apache
>>> way.
>>> 
>>> There's a notion that the incubator adds over head to smaller projects.
>> If
>>> you're a one-or-two developer group, who can commit one small change and
>>> cut a release in an afternoon, coming to apache with our 3 day voting
>>> periods seems crazy.
>>> 
>>> For small projects like Sirona, they may benefit from rapid iterate,
>>> release, feedback cycles. This is where tooling like GitHub becomes much
>>> more useful.  Once you get wikis, websites going, you can iterate and
>> seem
>>> like a strong community.  Until you become a community of 100's of users.
>>> 
>>> We don't want to see struggling podlings graduate.  This is why the
>>> incubator has no time limit.  We do get worried when a podling's been
>> here
>>> for too long.
>>> 
>>> Basically, Sirona may see some success retiring from Apache, moving
>>> development to github, until they've been able to build a bigger
>> community.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I think that we need to get over thinking of this state of affairs
>> is a
>>>>> "failure".
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is just one of the many different possible outcomes for
>> incubation.
>>> To
>>>>> my mind, having multiple possible outcomes is a *feature*, not a bug.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Obviously, we should not admit podlings that we aren't committed to
>>>> helping
>>>>> become TLP's and we should help those podlings become TLP's. But
>> there
>>>> are
>>>>> lots of different possible outcomes and only the podling can really
>>>>> determine which outcome it will have.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is a fact of nature that we cannot always know whether a new
>> podling
>>>>> really has the right intent and contributor mix to become a good TLP.
>>>>> Sometimes it is apparent that the project will be a great fit and
>>>> sometimes
>>>>> it is apparent that it won't be, but many times we won't exactly
>> know.
>>>>> There will be cases where a community will melt away and there will
>> be
>>>>> cases where a community really didn't get the point of the Apache
>>>> license.
>>>>> In many cases, the world just changes and by the time it is time to
>>>>> graduate, the project just isn't the right thing to do any more.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As such, I think we need to (somewhat) over-admit podlings when there
>>> is
>>>>> doubt. That doesn't mean admit projects that just won't ever succeed,
>>> but
>>>>> it does mean we should be a little generous in terms of admission. We
>>>>> should vote to admit in cases of some doubt.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If that is true, then we have to expect that there will be a variety
>> of
>>>>> outcomes and we have to take that as a consequence of our initial
>>>>> generosity. This is not a cause for tears. Frankly, every project
>> that
>>>>> becomes an obvious candidate for retirement means that there is
>> another
>>>>> successful project that we admitted even though there was doubt.
>>>>> 
>>>>> IF it is time to retire Sirona, let's just do it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Pierre Smits <
>> pierre.smits@gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> It is very sad to see a project failing at growing a community.
>>> Looking
>>>>> at
>>>>>> the various public sources, I see:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   - just 2 pull request since its start in incubation
>>>>>>   - no postings on the user ml since December 2015
>>>>>>   - only 3 committing contributors since start in incubation
>>>>>>   - No description (readme) in github
>>>>>>   - No mission statement/goal description of the project on the
>>>>> project's
>>>>>>   home page
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I fear this will not turn around due to the lack of interest in the
>>>> world
>>>>>> beyond the project. At the moment I am inclined to say: time for
>>>>>> retirement.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
>>>>>> OFBiz based solutions & services
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
>>>>>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>> jb@nanthrax.net
>>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi John
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think you did the right thing by bringing the point on the
>> table.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> AFAIR I already stated some months ago that, regarding the
>> activity
>>>> and
>>>>>>> regarding the community around, we should really think about
>>>> retirement
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> Sirona. Some can argue about the fact that Sirona is a "stable"
>>>> project
>>>>>>> that's not really valid: if it's valid we should see questions,
>>>> feature
>>>>>>> requests, etc coming from the user community. And obviously it's
>>> not
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> case. So I think that Sirona is just use for specific use cases
>> in
>>> a
>>>>> very
>>>>>>> limited community.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My €0.01 ;)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Apr 15, 2017, 15:49, at 15:49, "John D. Ament" <
>>>>> johndament@apache.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I hate bringing up these topics.  But I think we as the IPMC
we
>>> have
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> take a close look at how Sirona is running and figure out
what
>> to
>>> do
>>>>>>>> next.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - The podling has not reported in several months (this is
their
>>> 3rd
>>>>>>>> attempt
>>>>>>>> at monthly).
>>>>>>>> - Every time the thought of retirement comes up, a little
bit of
>>>>>>>> activity
>>>>>>>> on the project happens.  It doesn't sustain.
>>>>>>>> - There is some limited project history, but no real
>> contribution
>>>> in 6
>>>>>>>> months ( https://github.com/apache/sirona/commits/trunk )
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I personally don't want to see projects go, and I don't want
to
>>>> force
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> project to leave, but at the same time I'm not convinced
that
>>>> there's
>>>>>>>> enough of a community behind the project to sustain it going
>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>> They've put together a limited plan to get a release out
the
>> door,
>>>> but
>>>>>>>> other than that I'm not sure they're going to be able to
move
>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So I want to ask, as the IPMC, do we want to give them time
to
>>>>> regroup?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message