incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: The state of Sirona
Date Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:33:16 GMT
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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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