Hi all, I think I agree more with Alexandre and Ramesh to > "Put it on the GitHub repo and wait for the project to reach an adequate > maturity."
Or to repeat myself: > IMHO I also think we should keep the barrier for contributions low. Hence > using a GitHub repository as starting point could be a good decision. > This way contributing and building the first releases (alpha, beta, > whatever…) are completely independent from Apache (and any ICLA). > Afterward when the JPA extension project has contributors and a own > “community” it could be moved into a official Apache Git and under the OData > umbrella aka. Olingo ;o) > > tldr; Start with a low entry barrier on GitHub and end with a JPA extension > in Olingo (on Apache) Best Regards, Michael > On 14 Oct 2016, at 15:48, Alexandre Desjardins <bd.je...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems like Apache GitHub integration > is currently fairly lackluster. It does not seem to seamlessly integrate with > a lot of GitHub main features. For example, it does not seem to integrate > with GitHub issues, which is a big part of what makes a GitHub repository > "lively". As it stands, you mostly end up with a shell of what a GitHub > repository should be. > > > With that in mind, contributors would probably have to get familiar with the > jira issues and the ASF repository overall. If you add that to the fact that > contributors would also have to sign an ICLA, I think this would deter a lot > of potential small contributors. Also, it could be confusing to have an Alpha > under Olingo that is not officially supported or that might be dropped at any > time. > > Personally, I think either : > > - Put it on the GitHub repo and wait for the project to reach an adequate > maturity. (Maybe have some kind of link or encouragement from the main Olingo > site) > > or > > - Put it on the ASF repo in Alpha but officially support it > > Alexandre > > On 2016-10-14 9:24 AM, Ramesh Reddy wrote: >> GitHub repo is created to capture the early enthusiasm of community >> contributors without much restrictions of ICLA and ASF and also to gauge the >> interest of the participant to drive the feature to the somewhat of a mature >> state. If Olingo starts adapting all the extensions which are not directly >> involved with implementing the OData specification, it is just going to >> spread the current limited resources too thin and quality of our offering >> will surely to take hit. When PMC thinks that module has reached sufficient >> maturity and/or sustained interest, PMC to vote on bringing it under ASF >> repos and making the individuals part of the committers. >> >> Also even though we think Olingo has been established as umbrella project, >> our builds except of V2 vs V4 have not been set up to bring these kind of >> extensions in a non dependent fashion. This separate build/release process >> and code repositories absolutely must be there. If we are willing to take >> these steps, you will have my vote for it. >> >> Ramesh.. >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> On 14/10/2016 10:35, Amend, Christian wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I would like to reanimate this discussion. I have been trying to find >>>> information about having an Repository which is not under Apache control >>>> as part of an Apache project but I could not find any useful information >>>> about this. >>>> In my personal opinion we should not use the GitHub repository because as >>>> an Apache project we should rely on Apache infrastructure. This allows all >>>> Olingo PMC members to have committing rights and prevents a single person >>>> from having to provide/own the GitHub repository. >>>> Also I would see this as a good way to attract users/contributers to Olingo >>>> which we might miss if the connection between the GitHub repository and >>>> the Apache Olingo project isn`t clear. >>>> Also in my opinion we would not lose anything by providing an Alpha version >>>> via Olingo. If there is no feedback or contributions coming we can still >>>> decide not to take this forward. This would also mean that the current >>>> Olingo PMC members do not have to provide support for the Alpha version. >>>> >>>> Here is a link on the Apache to GitHub features: >>>> https://reference.apache.org/pmc/github for those interested. These >>>> features could be useful to integrate the GitHub mirror more. >>>> >>>> Please consider the points above and let me know what you think! >>> I have already expressed my preference below: a GIT repository, hosted >>> at the ASF infrastructure, with full-fledged GitHub integration. >>> We will not loose anything about attracting extra-ASF contribution, but >>> as PMC we will retain control over the repository itself. >>> >>> Obviously, this will require contributors to sign an ICLA, but I urge to >>> remind that this is the one of the pillars of how The ASF works. >>> >>> If this is seen as too onerous and discouraging new contributors, then >>> simply The ASF is not the right place to be and the V4 JPA effort should >>> better find its home as one of the numerous github-homed open source >>> projects in the wild. >>> With no official relationship with the Apache Olingo PMC, naturally. >>> >>> Regards. >>> >>>> From: mibo [mailto:m...@apache.org] >>>> Sent: Samstag, 24. September 2016 06:56 >>>> To: Grande, Oliver <oliver.gra...@sap.com>; dev@olingo.apache.org >>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] V4 JPA contribution >>>> >>>> >>>> IMHO I also think we should keep the barrier for further contributors (and >>>> contributions) to the JPA extension low. >>>> >>>> Hence using a GitHub repository as starting point could be a good decision. >>>> >>>> This way contributing and building the first releases (alpha, beta, >>>> whatever…) are completely independent from Apache (and any ICLA). >>>> >>>> Afterward when the JPA extension project has contributors and a own >>>> “community” it could be moved into a official Apache Git and under the >>>> OData umbrella aka. Olingo ;o) >>>> >>>> And if all works well the time between start on GitHub and then move to >>>> Olingo must not be long and could also include the direct promotion of >>>> Oliver to a Olingo committer / PMC (if he wish ;o) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> tldr; Start with a low entry barrier on GitHub and end (after some time) >>>> with a JPA extension in Olingo (on Apache) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Best Regards, Michael >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 23. September 2016 um 16:04:16, Grande, Oliver >>>> (oliver.gra...@sap.com<mailto:oliver.gra...@sap.com>) schrieb: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> as I'm new to Apache and Open Source I have the feeling that I can't help >>>> finding the right way is to handle my contribution. >>>> >>>> My idea was to contribute to the JPA processor after an initial >>>> contribution, as I see it only as a starting point. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Oliver >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ramesh Reddy [mailto:rare...@redhat.com] >>>> Sent: Freitag, 23. September 2016 15:18 >>>> To: dev@olingo.apache.org<mailto:dev@olingo.apache.org> >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] V4 JPA contribution >>>> >>>> IMO, creating the JIRA and promoting the extensions available on main >>>> Olingo website should not be an issue. Many projects do that such >>>> promotions, it is good for both parties, shows the whole eco-system around >>>> the main project. >>>> >>>> Another note I would like to emphasize is, if Oliver Grande contributed >>>> initial code, it is not necessary that he is the only one needs to take >>>> responsibility to integrate or complete it. Anyone of you with similar >>>> needs for JPA could continue the Oliver's work. >>>> >>>> Ramesh.. >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Has anyone officially been in contact with Oliver Grande since his >>>>> contribution? I know he is active on the user list, but I think it would >>>>> be nice to have his opinion regarding all of this. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I personally think creating a github repo and giving access to Oliver >>>>> Grande is indeed a good idea. If the ASF repo is not used, I still think >>>>> it would be nice to keep some kind of link with the main Olingo project >>>>> to let users know that the "main Olingo team" encourages contribution to >>>>> this JPA processor. Currently there is "odata4-JPA" listed as a Olingo >>>>> component, which leads to a summary with the POC jira items. Just an >>>>> idea, but would it be possible to delete the POC jira items and maybe >>>>> have that "odata4-JPA" summary link to the JPA processor potential >>>>> github repo? >>>>> >>>>> Alexandre >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2016-09-21 11:09 AM, Amend, Christian wrote: >>>>>> This is a valid point. If we put this code into an ASF repository the >>>>>> Olingo project as a whole is somewhat responsible for this code. This >>>>>> risk >>>>>> could be reduced by making the contributor Oliver Grande an Olingo >>>>>> committer so he could keep working on the code. He also started answering >>>>>> mails on the users list already so he seems committed. Of course adding >>>>>> another committer would require a vote on the private mailing list and >>>>>> requires the consent of the Olingo project. >>>>>> >>>>>> We could also think about giving commit access to the separate Git >>>>>> repository more freely to users that ask for it. This might also be an >>>>>> incentive for more contributions. I think it is possible to give commit >>>>>> access only to the new repository while leaving the core repo alone. >>>>>> We could also ask for volunteers on the user mailing list while clearly >>>>>> stating that we won`t accept this contribution to Olingo if there are not >>>>>> enough users that promise to contribute. Having an Alpha release could >>>>>> also help identify potential committers. And I don`t think that an Alpha >>>>>> release would require maintenance from the current Olingo PMC/committers. >>>>>> >>>>>> As for being cumbersome to work with the Apache repositories I agree. But >>>>>> I >>>>>> also heard that Apache is working on a tighter integration with the >>>>>> GitHub >>>>>> mirror. I am not sure how far this has progressed. Do you know anything >>>>>> about this? >>>>>> >>>>>> I personally would object to another separate Apache project for a JPA >>>>>> implementation. IMHO Olingo is the OData umbrella project at Apache. >>>>>> >>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Ramesh Reddy [mailto:rare...@redhat.com] >>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. September 2016 16:47 >>>>>> To: dev@olingo.apache.org<mailto:dev@olingo.apache.org> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] V4 JPA contribution >>>>>> >>>>>> IMO, at least there are two reasons for me >>>>>> - Working with ASF repository is cumbersome than the Github. Meaning >>>>>> working with external pull requests, code review features etc. I wish >>>>>> Olingo repo was on GitHub, instead of using the mirror. >>>>>> - second, most important is these are not part of ASF (yet), Olingo by >>>>>> including these in their repository comes with certain amount of >>>>>> responsibilities from committers, about their completeness, correctness, >>>>>> documents and management. Unless these are reasonably proved by the >>>>>> external community effort, Olingo committers are on hook to maintain >>>>>> these >>>>>> as if they were part of Olingo repo. So, my suggestion is wait until that >>>>>> time, then we can take vote to include with Olingo repo. If you are >>>>>> thinking outside of Olingo, then that need to be approached as new Apache >>>>>> project, that probably is completely separate effort. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ramesh.. >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> On 21/09/2016 16:32, Ramesh Reddy wrote: >>>>>>>> Yes, I have added the github organization and starter repo for this >>>>>>>> long >>>>>>>> time ago here https://github.com/olingo-extensions >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> let me know who is leading the effort with your Github userid, I will >>>>>>>> give >>>>>>>> the commit rights to the repo. >>>>>>> Any specific reason to not use an ASF repository (mirrored and >>>>>>> integrated with GitHub as others, of course)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>> On 21/09/2016 16:03, Amend, Christian wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> With Olingo Issue 1010 >>>>>>>>>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OLINGO-1010) >>>>>>>>>> we got a big contribution for the V4 Olingo code line. I personally >>>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>> this is great and we should integrate this into the Olingo project. >>>>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>>>> main question I have how this could be done best. >>>>>>>>>> From the V2 JPA extension we learned that the inability to make JPA >>>>>>>>>> releases independent from the core library hurts the development >>>>>>>>>> process. >>>>>>>>>> Also a lot of feedback was centered around extending the JPA >>>>>>>>>> processor >>>>>>>>>> and requiring callbacks to adjust the SQL statements before they are >>>>>>>>>> send >>>>>>>>>> to the database. I am not really familiar with JPA and I did not >>>>>>>>>> dive >>>>>>>>>> into the details of the contribution to see if these points are >>>>>>>>>> already >>>>>>>>>> met. Any feedback here is welcome. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For first steps I would suggest: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Delete the POC JPA Jira Items as they are not needed anymore >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Integrate the code into our repository in a branch so >>>>>>>>>> everyone >>>>>>>>>> can look at the code >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Decide on a repository >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Decide on a release strategy >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Perform an alpha release and collect feedback >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> WDYT? Do you have any ideas about how to set this up so we can make >>>>>>>>>> independent releases? Should we ask for a separate git repository? >>>>>>>>> IMO, a separate GIT repository with independent release process seems >>>>>>>>> the simpler way to handle what you report above. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just my 2c. >>>>>>>>> Regards. >>> -- >>> Francesco Chicchiriccò >>> >>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence >>> http://www.tirasa.net/ >>> >>> Member at The Apache Software Foundation >>> Syncope, Cocoon, Olingo, CXF, OpenJPA, PonyMail >>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/ >>> >>> >>> > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus >
