Thank you Sergio. Should I start the thread today? Should I send you a preview of the message as soon as it is ready so that you can all comment and improve it?
Jacopo On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Who of the mentors plan to stay as PMC member after FM graduates? > > > > I do. > > I think, before casting any graduation vote, I'd prefer to discuss these > issues in general@incubator, so we get a more formed opinion from external > people what they think about the viability of the community. I'd say > that Jacopo, as Champion, should start it. > > > > > Sunday, June 19, 2016, 4:39:54 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > > > > If the graduation vote fails the project would be told why. They > > > would continue in the incubator if they choose until whatever issues > > there were are addressed. > > > > > > PPMC members usually continue on as PMC members although mentors > > frequently don’t stay on. > > > > > > Ralph > > > > > >> On Jun 18, 2016, at 7:01 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >> Saturday, June 18, 2016, 9:41:19 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > > >> > > >>> I agree that it is the right time to discuss graduation. > > >>> In my opinion the incubation process for Freemarker has been > > successful and > > >>> for this reason I will vote +1 for the graduation. > > >>> As anticipated when we initially discussed the incubation, one > critical > > >>> aspect of the Freemarker project was its small committer's base; > under > > this > > >>> aspect the incubation process didn't do any magic and frankly > speaking > > I > > >>> was not expecting it to happen. > > >>> However, as mentioned by Daniel and Sergio, the project is mature but > > there > > >>> are plans for the future that will keep the community busy, not just > > >>> maintaining the old code. > > >>> This community has still to find a more effective way to attract new > > >>> committers but this should not be a blocker to become a top level > > project @ > > >>> ASF. > > >> > > >> And for the record, I think that requires some substantial > > >> modernization/cleanup, which I have called FreeMarker 3 as it drops > > >> backward compatibility. There are many things where FreeMarker 2 can > > >> be evolved further without breaking backward compatibility, but making > > >> the project more attractive is also timely, and the resources are > > >> scarce, so I think we can't have both. > > >> > > >>> It is however important to verify that we will have, even after > > graduation, > > >>> a PMC group capable of casting at least 3 positive votes on releases. > > >> > > >> Is it customary for PPMC members of the poddling to be also in the PMC > > >> of the graduated project? If so, can any of you express his intent > > >> regarding that? > > >> > > >> What are the risks of failing the graduation vote? > > >> > > >> BTW, something that I can do to help it, to document some > > >> project-specific rules, and a step-by-step release tutorial. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Thanks, > > >> Daniel Dekany > > >> > > >> > > >>> Jacopo > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Sergio Fernández <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Daniel, > > >>>> > > >>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected] > > > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> I think we can start some discussion about that even now. Or at > least > > >>>>> I will tell what do I think about the state of the project. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Great step. Thanks. > > >>>> > > >>>> The main problem is the number of active developers, which is 1, me. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I'm aware... > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/graphs/contributors?from=2015-07-01&type=c > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> What if I'm hit by a truck tomorrow? We can hope that if there's a > > bug > > >>>>> that concerns many, then someone will eventually fix it. After all > > the > > >>>>> owner (ASF) won't be gone, the release infrastructure is there, > etc. > > >>>>> But as far as non-bugfix development goes, it's certain that things > > >>>>> would stop. Some may say that that's OK for a project that's > > >>>>> backward-compatibility-locked for 12 years now (the 2.x line is > > >>>>> actually 14 years old). > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Well, I'd say that's critical, but the community of a project is > more > > than > > >>>> the developers who code. And the Freemarker community is much bigger > > than > > >>>> what you could think. > > >>>> > > >>>> For instance if you consider my personal case: I volunteered for > > mentor > > >>>> because I knew the project for so long. I even code some extensions > ( > > >>>> http://marmotta.apache.org/ldpath/template.html). Definitively I > used > > >>>> Freemarker much more in the past than currently, but Web development > > has > > >>>> changed a lot, moving more stuff to the frontend (10 years ago we > > didn't > > >>>> have AngularJS). > > >>>> > > >>>> So I'd say there are many people like me out there, using every day > > >>>> solutions based on Freemarker. People who are not that close to the > > source > > >>>> base, but familiar enough to be able to jump in at any time a > provide > > a > > >>>> patch. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> But of course that's just slow death if a > > >>>>> project can't counter its old design problems and can't evolve to > > >>>>> tackle new problems anymore. So indeed 2.x should switch to > > >>>>> maintenance eventually (but ATM there are still things that can be > > >>>>> done in 2.x), but only to give place for 3.x. Anyway, how to catch > > >>>>> long standing developers? I don't think that 2.x have a real chance > > >>>>> for that, because of all the legacy code burden piled up. (Some > > Apache > > >>>>> projects have many paid contributors, but I think FM isn't the kind > > of > > >>>>> project that can have that, so it's important that the developers > > want > > >>>>> to fiddle with it for free.) So the 3.x jump will be necessary, and > > >>>>> then, maybe, we can have a developer base growth (template engines > > >>>>> isn't hot topic anymore, so I just mean having a few developers > > >>>>> around). But 3.x is far away (if it will happen at all), and we > can't > > >>>>> hang around in the incubator forever. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Well, we can consider 2.3.x feature-complete, and 2.3.25-incubating > a > > >>>> maintenance release. The world has change a lot in template business > > in > > >>>> these 14 years. But I'm pretty sure FreeMarker has its place there, > > and 3.x > > >>>> could bring some many great ideas that may attract potential new > > >>>> contributors. And that's what I see as future of this project. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> So, do you believe there's any chance to graduate with the current > > >>>>> developer base? > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Definitively that has been always the major issue with this podling. > > >>>> Honestly I'm not sure. But following with all my argumentation that > > the > > >>>> community is much bigger that what shows the development team, I'd > say > > >>>> could be at least discussed with the IPMC. > > >>>> > > >>>> Looking forward to hear every body else's opinions. > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers, > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> Sergio Fernández > > >>>> Partner Technology Manager > > >>>> Redlink GmbH > > >>>> m: +43 6602747925 > > >>>> e: [email protected] > > >>>> w: http://redlink.co > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Sergio Fernández > Partner Technology Manager > Redlink GmbH > m: +43 6602747925 > e: [email protected] > w: http://redlink.co >
