Hi Charles-François,

thanks for your detailed message, you captured important points, and I
think I agree with your sentiment here. Mesos might still have a place, and
before thinking about what new features to add, the project first needs to
solve more fundamental issues.

My previous pessimistic assessment on this list came from a similar angle
but I think with wider scope: a healthy project requires a healthy
community where users can find help, but also can have some hope that
important issues will get fixed. I have not been able to spend much time on
Mesos in the last year, but was following Slack and the mailing lists (the
ones with humans and the ones with bots). On the mailing lists I see users
ask for help with issues they run into or questions, but only rarely will
get a response from committers or other community members. Few new JIRA
issues were filed in the since fall 2020, but hardly any of them have been
triaged let alone fixed (this is on top of the existing bug backlog). I do
not think one needs to be a committer to improve on that situation if one
can get help getting patches discussed, reviewed and ultimately merged. It
looks like Andrei and Qian have committed to help on the latter, but I have
only rarely seen community members volunteer for the former.

When I wrote that I thought starting a new project on top of Apache Mesos
today might be not a good idea, I mainly came from that angle. While the
software does work for many use cases it seems to be unmaintained with
hardly any folks active in taking it further globally, beyond their own
immediate needs, and willing to take on the needed work. Being a top-level
Apache project with a strong history, Apache Mesos still has a brand, but I
don't think it has lived up to the associated expectations. Similarly, big
ownership gaps (technical and project-wise) have developed which neither
active committers nor community members have filled. Again, one would not
need to be a committer to develop expertise and contribute, and actually
the natural and historic process was for folks to do exactly that with
committership being a thing only after getting involved (see
https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html for Apache's high-level view
on that). This is the issue of continued trust Renan mentioned in their
message to the user mailing list which I also believe is critical so the
project can live up to its promise (this is integral to being an Apache
project, see e.g., https://www.apache.org/theapacheway).

As a non-user with emotional attachment to the historic Apache Mesos brand,
my list of areas in need of improvement to resurrect this project would be:

- willingness of remaining active committers to be active on a regular
basis in engagements with the community, both on the user and contributor
side (in PRs, review requests, on mailing lists),
- transparent and active discussions in the community, among committers and
contributors, and among committers, in applicable form, beyond roll calls,
- timely and consistent process to address user issues, and
- consistent ownership of the bug and feature backlog.

Note that work on new feature requests is absent from my list. That folks
want to discuss that here and now seems to me to be another sign that the
Mesos community is not in a good place given all its existing non-technical



Reply via email to