meant to add dev@brooklyn.a.o On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 at 15:25, Geoff Macartney <geom...@apache.org> wrote:
> Can we try to get some data on what amount of effort is required here? > Andrew, Ignasi, here are some questions for you. > > If we want to at least keep Jclouds going, without necessarily doing much > fresh feature development on it: > > 1. What do you think is a desirable *minimum* number of active > contributors to the project (doing releases, dependency updates, security > fixes, occasional important bug fixes)? > 2. How much work is that likely to involve? (Approx time commitment). > Let's separate out how much effort it is to build, test and publish a > release from other stuff which is going to be more ad-hoc. > 3. How much access to cloud providers/infrastructure is required to test a > release? How expensive is it? > 4. How much work would it be for new contributors to learn the codebase > well enough to contribute effectively? > > I ask (1) because I think we need to focus on how many new people we need > to get involved. It seems that the current number of active contributors is > approximately 1, Andrew, with some time perhaps from Ignasi and others? > I ask (2) because I think any of us will want to know what we would need > to do if we volunteer to become an active contributor. (I'm sure I'm not > the only one who doesn't feel they have a lot of spare time.) > I ask (3) because any of us may be in the same boat as me - I wouldn't be > allowed to do any jclouds work using my employer's cloud provider accounts > or infrastructure, so I would have to use personal accounts. The only ones > I have personally are AWS and GCP. Would any of us need a wide range of > provider accounts to test a release? How much would the testing cost? I > would be reluctant to run a test suite I didn't know on a personal account. > I'm sure we've all heard stories about nightmare AWS bills... > Finally (4) gives us an idea of the ramp-up involved. I think we can > assume that we're all fairly experienced Java devs, or we wouldn't be > reading this. But say we've never looked into the code yet. Would you or > others have any time to help bring us up to speed? I did a bit of work on > jclouds back around 2016 and the way I remember it is that it took a week > or two to get my head around the bits I needed to know, but it was > reasonably straightforward, the code wasn't very convoluted. I had to take > the time to learn about Guava/Guice. But back then I was able to work on it > in the day job, and had great help learning it from Andrea Turli; thanks > Andrea ;-) > > I think if we know better how much it will take, we can each more easily > ask ourselves, "could I do this"? If enough of us say "yes", we may avoid > the attic yet. > > Geoff > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 22:28, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Il Sab 10 Dic 2022, 12:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> ha >> scritto: >> >> > Ok. Fair enough. >> > >> > Imho Karaf-jclouds is probably different as the number of users is very >> > very thin. >> > >> > But I understand your points. >> > >> > I will support of moving to attic anyway. Just wanted to give a chance >> for >> > the community to speak up. >> > >> > The users will find alternatives (maybe forking part of jclouds). >> > >> >> I think that forking jclouds is not a good solution, as you lose all the >> potential interactions with other users, for instance in case of security >> issues (cannot inform all the users, share patches in a coodinated way). >> >> I understand the points of the people in this thread that are skeptical >> about adding external people. Probably I would feel the same way. >> >> I believe that it is up to the jcloud PMC to decide on the destiny of the >> project and as JB is saying, users will find their solutions. >> >> My 2 cents >> >> Enrico >> >> >> >> > Thanks >> > Regards >> > JB >> > >> > Le sam. 10 déc. 2022 à 11:34, Ignasi Barrera <n...@apache.org> a écrit >> : >> > >> > > Even if it is maintenance, now it's not time for just good intentions >> > > (which are very much appreciated), but time for action, and action is >> not >> > > there and my confidence in it happening any time soon is very low. >> > > >> > > Let me give you a concrete example: >> > > >> > > * In 2019, we voted on moving jcloud-karaf under the Apache Karaf >> project >> > > [1] because we were not able to maintain the project properly. >> > > * The last commit in the transferred project [2] is from 2019 (3 years >> > > back). >> > > * That project is still in jclouds 2.2.0, whilst jclouds is in 2.6.0; >> > it's >> > > still 4 releases behind. >> > > >> > > There have been no feature additions, but over 3 years there haven't >> > > even been maintenance tasks done at all, even just to keep the >> project up >> > > to date with upstream jclouds. >> > > >> > > Although I appreciate all the good intentions of people volunteering, >> I >> > > don't see any action here (as Gaul also requested), and honestly, I >> think >> > > repeating the jcloud-karaf story will not do any favor to users. If we >> > > change the PMC and inactivity continues, jclouds will be even in a >> worse >> > > position than it is today: it will keep having an inactive PMC, but >> > > composed of people that are even less familiar/expert in its codebase. >> > > >> > > IMO, if we really care about users, we should see something here >> beyond >> > the >> > > much-appreciated good intentions, because we've tried this route in >> the >> > > past and it has not worked. >> > > >> > > >> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/30770j9jwcn14vzczzkbhz37g8q2olc6 >> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/karaf-jclouds >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:58 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net >> > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > That's a fair comment. As we are mostly talking about >> "maintenance", I >> > > > don't wait for any new big features in the short term. >> > > > As said, the main concern for these guys is about jclouds as an >> > > > important dependency in their project. >> > > > >> > > > I can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng >> guys >> > > > (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency. >> > > > >> > > > Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do >> in >> > > > Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf). >> > > > >> > > > Regards >> > > > JB >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:55 PM Ignasi Barrera < >> > ignasi.barr...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > It's not about me, it's about people volunteering actually >> stepping >> > up >> > > > > and starting to take action, and that is not happening. >> > > > > >> > > > > You say: 'After some months, we will definitely see if the >> project is >> > > > still >> > > > > alive or not." >> > > > > It's been 2 months now. In your opinion, how many more months of >> > > inaction >> > > > > should we wait, and what's the reasoning behind that number? >> > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 6:01 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >> j...@nanthrax.net >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > If you don't want to continue on jclouds (I fully understand >> this), >> > > > > > fair enough. But if people still want to maintain it, I don't >> see >> > any >> > > > > > issue there. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Is a fork better ? I don't think so. Because, it might happen >> if we >> > > > > > retire the project. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > As I proposed earlier, if the current PMC members don't want to >> > > > > > continue on jclouds, but we have potential volunteers to take >> > over, I >> > > > > > think it's fair to try. Apache is community driven, if we have >> new >> > > > > > people in the jclouds community, willing to help, we could be >> > > > > > "welcoming". >> > > > > > After some months, we will definitely see if the project is >> still >> > > > alive or >> > > > > > not. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > If you absolutely want to retire the project, I'm with you, and >> > then >> > > > > > pulsar or brooklyn (or another project) will do a fork probably. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Regards >> > > > > > JB >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera <n...@apache.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I agree with Gaul's comments. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens >> ;) >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project >> and >> > > to >> > > > > > date, >> > > > > > > nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments. >> > > > > > > If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is >> all >> > > the >> > > > > > energy >> > > > > > > that is around to maintain it, I don't think it is a setup for >> > > > success >> > > > > > and >> > > > > > > agree with Gaul that we will better serve users by retiring >> the >> > > > project. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > P.S. Geoff, really appreciate your honesty in accounting for >> your >> > > > > > bandwidth! >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
