I fully agree with Daniel and the top ten priorities he suggested. I haven't looked at Gary's code either (assuming this is the repo at https://github.com/apache/bloodhound-core), this is the first thing I will do, and I will share my feedback as soon as I can.
Nikolay Tsanov +1-819-635-7198 On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 1:38 PM Daniel Brownridge < [email protected]> wrote: > I just wanted to say thank you to Greg and Shane for providing all the > detailed information so far. It feels like we're not quite dead (I mean in > the Attic) yet, but will be soon if we don't do something. > > In the interests of maintaining momentum here ,which seems to be > gathering, I'll keep sharing my thoughts. I'm happy to help in whatever way > I can. > > Personally I don't think I'm in a position to commit just yet even if I > wanted to, I've not yet signed an ICLA but have no problem doing so, I just > never got round to it before. So, I'll make that my personal mission for > this week, to sort that an any associated Apache official admin with the > intention that that will put me in a position to be more useful to the > project going forward. As I get into that I may need to ask for more > specific help but I don't quite know what I'm asking for yet! > > As for some project goals it feels like there are two main areas we can > focus on. > > The first is practical getting the project up and running stuff. The > second is future development and direction stuff. To me that feels like the > right order because if we focus on the former it gives a bit more time to > gather our collective thoughts and discuss the later. > > So for the project part. I definitely support the use of Git as the > primary source code management system and think we should move towards > that. If that's GitHub then that completely works for me too. Correct me if > I'm wrong, but I think that it was at one point that Bloodhound was > 'self-hosting' for Issues on live.bloodhound.apache.org and for whatever > reason that's not the case now. Getting back to that feels like a nice > thing to aim for medium term. There may be multiple things involved in > doing that though and whilst this may seem contradictory I actually also > agree with Nikolay in the short-term, which is we should just use GitHub > issues (or whatever) until we've achieved the admin around getting a live > Bloodhound up and running again. > > To elaborate a little on the above suggestion since it might seem odd, > through my work recently I've had a fair bit of experience with these > chicken-and-egg style problems and have dealt with a handful of situations > where to achieve X you need Y but to have Y you first need X and things go > round in circles for ages. But if you look at it differently and realise > that although Z might not be what you want for some other reason in the > short term Z provides an alternative route to X and once you have X you can > go back and get Y later then things unlock and you get moving again. So if > 'GitHub Issues' can be our 'Z' here then I'm all for that. > > In the very-short term lacking any form of issue tracker it feels like > this mailing list probably has to serve as our main point of contact until > we can fix that. That will mean that the mailing list in the short term > might get (relatively) busy (but as previously stated there are only a few > of us so we can probably cope). > > As for the direction, I support transitioning Bloodhound to being Django > based. I have to be honest I haven't yet looked in detail at the > experimental work that has been done by Gary in that area yet, but that too > is going on my todo list. In general though I really like the idea of > having a Python based OpenSource issue tracker that is somewhat comparable > in terms of practical utility to the likes of the more commercial tools. By > that I mean multi-project, support workflows, and basic Agile features such > as a backlog and Kanban board style view. > > So here is a starter for 10 suggested priority list (fully expecting > comments / disagreements but that's the point) > > 1. Get a live list of issues we can all get around, somehow, somewhere. > Current best suggestion (which I agree with) use GitHub issues. > > 2. Switch from Subversion to Git as primary source control. > > 3. Resurrect live.bloodhound.apache.bloodhound.org if possible with the > current version of Bloodhound. > > 4. Make a plan to get back off GitHub issues again. > > 5. Get consensus on the future development roadmap. (Possible features > suggestion - 'Make it easy to import issues from Github Issues!') > > What do you think? > > *Daniel Brownridge* > [email protected] > +44 779 138 5626 > On 20/08/2023 13:59, Nikolay Tsanov wrote: > > @Greg Stein <[email protected]> <[email protected]> , thank you for the timely > and commendably > thorough response. As far as the development part of the community is > concerned, to top priority concern that should be dealt with is, as you > defined it: > "- if we want to evolve this, then I'd suggest making svn read-only and > carrying forward with a git-based codebase" > > The choice of a version control system goes far beyond the tech stack, it > defines the governance at the technology layer of the Bloodhound > architecture and, simply put, a non-Git version control system is a > roadblock (I am in the same boat as Daniel Brownridge who wrote on Aug 18, > 2023, 7:56 AM (2 days ago) “I’ve struggled a bit to get started. I found > the Apache initiation rituals a bit challenging."). > > In personal capacity, I must regretfully let you know that I will not > invest any time until this essential technology architecture concern (Git > vs SVN) is formally addressed, e.g. we start using GitHub for code review > and issues tracking. I know that it might sound demoralizing that an issues > tracking system as Bloodhound is not eating its own dogfood and it is using > a third party as GitHub for tracking its own issues, however this is what > we need in order to get traction. > > Thanks, > Nikolay Tsanov > +1-819-635-7198 > > On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 10:58 PM Greg Stein <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 6:08 AM Nikolay Tsanov <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > Two questions: > 1. Is the verdict to send Bloodhound to the attic already rendered and > you are simply letting us know about it, or there is still room for > discussions? > 2. If the debate is still open, how many commits are required per what > period of time in order to keep Bloodhound off the attic? > > > I'm just relating my experience with "how things work", given my extensive > time with the ASF. I've been to over 200 Board meetings, and unfortunately > missed the meeting a few days ago where Bloodhound was discussed (I'm > traveling right now; which speaks to Shane's point about "give people time; > 24h is not enough") > > Moving is not a given, as Shane noted later in this thread. The Board > simply needs to see a community, and if that is present, then it will defer > to those people (it is squishy; there are no "commit metrics"; it's about > people). For all intents and purposes, there isn't an Apache Bloodhound > community right now. > > ... but given the responses, is there enough? Of course. It only takes a > few. > > So far, Daniel, yourself (Nikolay), and Sz have spoken up to throw in some > time to see if we have enough energy to (re)launch Apache Bloodhound. > > Let me collect a few queries into this single email... > > * the (archival) repository is in svn, and mirrored to github. > - if we want to evolve this, then I'd suggest making svn read-only and > carrying forward with a git-based codebase > * the "experimental" repository is > at:https://github.com/apache/bloodhound-core > andhttps://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/bloodhound-core.git > - the above is Gary's initial work towards a v2 vision/prototype > - there is no community consensus on future direction, so far; > individual exploration and input is needed > * "jettison burden" means it won't be Apache Bloodhound > - personally, I welcome the legal umbrella/shield of the ASF, so I'm > happy that I signed an ICLA (which is not a burden, IMO) > > I think the biggest issue is in the middle there: where is Bloodhound > headed? Evolve the existing branch? Strike out on something new, like Gary > was exploring (a Django-based solution), or something else? Personally, I'd > like to see a Quart-based app server using a sqlite database. Keep it super > simple and easy to set up. > > Regarding the repository: file some PRs. Or maybe we can use the GitHub > wiki to figure out a roadmap. "commit" is several steps down the road, and > sure: we can easily make that happen. But even if everybody had commit > tomorrow, we don't have a consensus vision yet. > > Cheers, > -g > > ps. note that I also hold a role in Infra; I can directly/immediately make > changes to support the community. > > > >
