Hi Joe, I see that the secretary has registered the SGA in the Foundation archives.
I’ve updated the status page to include this fact along with the list of initial committers. So far 8 of the 16 initial committers have iCLAs on file. Regards, Dave > On Jun 8, 2017, at 5:56 PM, Joe F <[email protected]> wrote: > > The SGA has just been submitted. > > Joe > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Folks, >> >> Please respond to emails here and discuss the podling. In order to move to >> the incubator we need to start talking. >> >>> On Jun 5, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Matteo Merli <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I hope everyone already subscribed this mailing list already. >> >> Several iCLAs were processed by the ASF secretary on Friday. Accounts >> should be setup and I will add to the LDAP groups tomorrow. >> >>> >>> I wanted to start the discussion on multiple points for onboarding into >> the >>> incubator. >>> >>> First of all, which tools we want to keep using when moving the >> development >>> over at the ASF. >>> >>> In particular, we need to chose about: >>> 1. Git repository and committer workflow >>> 2. Github issues vs JIRA >> >> The proposal requested a JIRA which I requested and is now available at >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PULSAR/ >> >> If the project wishes to switch to Github issues that would be fine. >> >>> 3. Jenkins vs Travis for CI >>> >>> The support for using Github tools for Apache project has been a recent >>> addition. Masakazu pointed to me that it was actually discussed at the >>> latest ApacheCon (https://youtu.be/yWurOHvm5WM?t=1078) and that right >> now >>> INFRA is supporting projects to use Github as the primary repository and >>> issues. >>> >>> I think for us it would make sense to continue using Github tools that >> has >>> worked reasonably well in the past and it will be frictionless both from >>> our perspective as for potential contributors. >>> >>> The other point would be to directly transfer the repository from >>> "yahoo/pulsar" to "apache/incubator-pulsar", instead of creating a new >>> repo. >>> The advantage would be to keep all the current issues/PRs, plus people >> that >>> are subscribed to the repository events. >>> >>> I think that the logistic for this would be to give access to >> yahoo/pulsar >>> repo to ASF INFRA so that they can perform the switch. >> >> We need to have a discussion on this. We can discuss Consensus as part of >> the discussion. >> >>> >>> About the SGA from Yahoo, Joe can you also update here whenever the grant >>> is submitted? >>> >>> Finally, when repository and grant aspects are resolved, I would suggest >> to >>> make one last release (1.18), ASAP, before moving the code over to the >>> ASF. The reason is that we have already accumulated lot of changes and >>> fixes in the current master and that it will take us some amount of time >> to >>> prepare well for an official release within the incubator. >>> We will need to sort lot of details and possibly make multiple iterations >>> before we can be ready for a release. >> >> If you want to do a release on the old infrastructure then perhaps that is >> first. >> >>> >>> So, release what we have right now, and then concentrate in making a >> proper >>> release in the incubator (detached from the amount of "features" >> contained). >>> >>> Any thoughts / opinions? >>> >>> Please also raise any other point or question that I have missed. >>> >>> Matteo >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
