We have two other threads going on this. One is in the private@ mailing list, which we then moved into the dev@ list to get general community input on this.
We are actively discussing the role the cloudstack org will play and nothing has been decided. My understanding is that we have no intention of creating a fork of apache/cloudstack in the sense that it is a divergence in codebase. We are evaluating the idea of using the cloudstack/cloudstack as a staging area to validate the PRs that are opened against apache/cloudstack and run different CI and validation tools against the code. The goal is to be able to improve the quality of the code committed back to apache/cloudstack by being able to better integrate automated testing and validation of the code. The code would still be pushed back to the canonical ASF Cloudstack repo. *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Sebastien, > > > [..] > >> > >> Hi Sebastien, > >> > >> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board. > >> > >> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the > >> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that > >> there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned > >> at the prospect of Apache Cloudstack forking and starting a new > >> GitHub organization, so I’m here now to discuss. > > > >We are not forking. In the sense that the canonical repo is at the ASF > >and mirrored on apache/cloudstack. > > OK, good though based on the rest of your replies, I actually see > the opposite being said. Also “we” is the relative word here, which > I’ll get back to later in this message. > > > > >The cloudstack org on github existed and was empty, one of us contacted > >github and we got the “control” of it. > > > >> > >> I’m sorry that you are unhappy with the lack of access to GitHub > >> facilities, however I’m confused, the ASF does provide mirroring, > >> active GitHub issue, > > > >As far as I know we cannot use github issues. > >[..snip..] > >To close PRs you need to make a commit. > [..snip..] > >Be able to use labels > >Be able to setup our own triggers/hooks > > David Nalley can speak to this as I’m not sure if you can or > cannot or if infra@ is providing this. Thanks for stating this. > > > > > > >> PMC desires and if so can you state that? I remember seeing a request > >> that you wanted the ability to close pull requests and to be part of > >> the experiment going on with the Whimsy PMC - > > > >Indeed, and I (we) never heard back. > > Right - that’s probably b/c it wasn’t discussed with the board > until our last meeting which just happened yesterday. It’s > my reading of the tea leaves that the experiment, while considered > going in the right direction with Whimsy, is not open to other > PMCs. It’s possible that we may as a board decide that further > response is needed, but until that happens or if that doesn’t happen > you can take my response until then. > > >[..snip..] > > > > >> 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. > > 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. > > I also wanted to gauge whether there are others on the PMC that will > speak up. I’ll continue waiting to hear more about that. > > >[..snip..] > >Again, this is not about leaving the ASF. This is about accessing > >productive tools and making use of them to their fullest. > > > >> Finally, as for the Apache Cloudstack PMC - for the PMC the policy of > >> the ASF is that the canonical repository at the moment is on ASF > >>hardware. > > > >And we would like the ASF to reconsider this. > > Put bluntly, the decision is no, and it is in the hands of the ASF Infra@ > and based on > discussions I’ve seen on public lists there and on board@ and part of the > board > meeting yesterday, Infra@ is not opening up the Whimsy experiment to other > PMCs > as of yet. They aren’t ready to declare an SLA; they aren’t ready for > potential > other PMCs to ask to use it too and for others to start thinking that > capability > is anything near operational. David Nalley can fill in more. > > > > >> There are not any approved policies for external forks being the > >>canonical > >> repo, especially those in another GitHub organization not managed by the > >> ASF. There is an experiment in the Apache Whimsy PMC to experiment with > >> GitHub as the canonical repo for an apache/* org project. That is still > >>an > >> experiment and not widely offered by ASF infra to all PMCs. > >> > > > >Are other projects than Whimsy being allowed to experiment ? > > Not at this time. > > >[..snip..] > >> > > > >And just to clarify, you are acting here as “the board” ? Meaning the > >board asked you to get on dev@ and talk with our community after seeing > >our report ? > >I am asking because the PMC has not received an official response from > >the board based on our report (and annexed interim report). > > I am one of 9 Directors, but I believe if you’d like to test the waters > that > I have support of other board members in asking these questions based on > the > meetings yesterday. And as one of the Directors of the board and a > long-time > ASF’er, I’m here also as a concerned member since some actions that I have > seen > by Cloudstack related to this GitHub external organization imply to me > that there > is something more than meets the eye here. > > Let’s keep discussing, hopefully with more participation from the > community besides > the two of us. > > Cheers, > Chris > > > > >> Thanks, > >> Chris > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> > >> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > >> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 3:15 AM > >> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > >> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack > >>pull > >> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) > >> > >>> Hi Chris, > >>> > >>> We have never met but i recognize your name from members only ASF > >>>threads. > >>> > >>> For the benefit of others on this list it is useful to mention that you > >>> are a member of the ASF board. > >>> > >>> The PMC has filed its quarterly report for march, as well as an > >>>interim > >>> report about a month ago. The interim report was acknowledged by Sam > >>>Ruby > >>> couple days ago only. > >>> > >>> I am assuming that the board will discuss it at its monthly meeting and > >>> that we will hear from the board then. > >>> > >>> Other than that the discussions are active on dev@ , but roughly we > >>>feel > >>> that we are being hurt by lack of access to github facilities. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> > >>> -Sebastien > >>> > >>>> On 17 Mar 2016, at 00:04, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> Sorry about my crude way of filing a PR for this, but I heard > >>>> information about the Apache Cloudstack PMC actively > >>>> discussing managing the project with GitHub as the primary source > >>>> in a different organization than the github.com/apache/ org. > >>>> > >>>> Can someone clarify this for me? Clearly wearing my board hat, > >>>> this is not something we allow for any of our ASF projects. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Chris “board hat on” Mattmann > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > > > > >
