+BCC: David Nalley for possible guidance. Apache infra stated that 'The VP' dictated the policy to not allow 'repo:status' across the board for projects. Has anyone tried to engage the VP, in order to get them to have a closer look at this policy? It appears to be no way to exploit that function maliciously... so hopefully they could allow for this to be enabled.
$0.02 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Erik Weber <terbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > >> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the > > >> result of a subset of the PMC going off and doing this - > > > > > >I am not sure why you say subset. Let’s try to avoid polemics. > > > > I’m not trying to attack. > > > > > This is not the result of people getting together and saying 'hey, we > should fork and work somewhere else, that'd be fun!', but rather > 'hey, we are currently unable to do what we need to do, and none of our > attempts of getting assistance have resulted in anything. what can we do?'. > > On January 27th 2016, Schuberg Philis (SBP), a company with many CloudStack > contributors/committers/pmcs, announced that they are 'jumping ship, > forking the code and going their own way'. (that's my wording, not theirs) > > Take a look at our git commit history before and after that date. Notice > anything? > Most, if not all, are trivial commits to fix typos, simple mistakes etc. > and not code changes. > > This may be rude to everyone else, but the fact is that after 4.5 SBP > (there are a few exceptions) has done more or less everything when it comes > to testing code and gatekeeping the code base. And they did a very good job > at it. > Frankly I am surprised they even coped with it that long. > > Apache CloudStack now has a fork (Cosmic), that's not bound by ASF policies > and it's lack of progress when it comes to providing the tools necessary. > > When (or if -- with their own governing they don't have to call it a > specific version) SBP release an official version of Cosmic, it would > surprise me if not a lot of CloudStack users would atleast try it out. > I am pretty sure that I am going to. > > And wha-bang, there (potentially) goes your community, because there > already is a better option out there. > > > > > I asked a simple question - how many/who in the Apache CloudStack PMC > > is intent on using this new Cloudstack GitHub organization? Not an > > attack, a question that I still don’t have an answer to. > > > > > The answer would most likely be 'anyone and everyone'. > Contrary to what you might believe, this is being done to /help/ > CloudStack, not hurt it. Atleast that is my intention by participating. > > In case you are unfamiliar with Apache CloudStack, it is a beast. > Unlike many typical ASF projects you cannot just unpack the tarball, run > 'make test', wait a few minutes and have it properly tested. > Testing Apache CloudStack requires a broad variety of physical hardware, > network appliances, storage solutions and least but most importantly pretty > much every hypervisor that is being used out there. > > A subset of the test tasks we have take multiple hours to run and only > tests a small fraction of the total codebase. > > Pre 4.6, the Apache CloudStack community had a little to loose discipline > on committing to the codebase. > Testing was optional, and hardly done. > > We had multiple versions that had major flaws in them, discovered right > after release as people tried to use it -- even for the most basic > operations. > > For the 4.6 release we decided that from now on, every commit would have to > be looked through by two different persons, saying they approve it, and > tested by a minimum of one. > > And it worked, the voting process improved, we released rapidly and with > far less issues than previously (no software is bug free after all). > > As mentioned, we require that code changes (be it improvements, fixes or > new features) are tested before they are allowed to be committed. > > Which means that anyone wanting to interact (with code) have to do it > theirselves at the moment, and that is _NOT_ an easy task. > Which again means that no matter how good your intention is, your PR is not > going be merged. > What kind of Community treatment is that? > > > The way I see it there is only one solution to this -- we need better > testing, and to automate that we need more access to GitHub. > > There are two ways to do that; > 1) By being granted certain permissions to the apache/cloudstack > repository. > 2) By doing it somewhere else where we have those permissions. > > Will Stevens asked infra [1] for a small subset of permissions -- none of > which should be any real risk for disasters, and got rejected. > That rules out option #1. > > This turned out to be a long, and emotional email, please don't take any > grunts personally -- they are not meant to be. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-11429 > > > -- > Erik >
