I think Amos was probably coming from a risk assessment point of view. If the company who invests in zeppelin folds or decides to reassign developers then there is a real risk that the talent pool for Zeppelin would drop dramatically.
As Roman said, it's not a blocker to graduation and it's not necessarily a bad thing in terms of vision or project management, but it does add more risk to the longevity of the project (which I think is great by the way and I'll try and free up some time in the near future to help out) Tom On 12 Feb 2016 5:31 am, "moon soo Lee" <m...@apache.org> wrote: > Correction > > from > > And programmer is a requirement of (P)PMC [1]. > > to > > And programmer is not a requirement of (P)PMC [1]. > > Thanks, > moon > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:30 PM moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Appreciate Amos, for sharing thoughtful concerns. > > > > If i add more answer, > > > > So far, Zeppelin has 8 PPMC from 4 different affiliations. And 5 of them > > is work in the same company. 3 of them from 3 different affiliation > invited > > since it's incubation. > > > > I personally think all 3 are good programmer, but it may depends on how > > you define 'programmer'. And programmer is a requirement of (P)PMC [1]. > > > > In point of view of survival, Zeppelin will still have at least 3 > > different PPMC from 3 different affiliation, in the case of all PPMC > > disappearing from any particular affiliation. Project still able to make > > any decisions. > > > > Diversity of PPMC affiliation is not a requirement of graduation > according > > to this thread [2] (I guess this is the email that Roman mention). > > > > I think meaning of 'diversity' is not limited to affiliation. 'Diversity' > > can be location, language, nationality, gender, background, experience, > and > > so on. In this perspective, I think Zeppelin PPMC are quite diverse. > > > > One person could have more commits than others. > > But that doesn't give more votes because of that. All people has the same > > single vote, that's effective particularly making decision in Apache way. > > > > > > Regarding diversity of view points, > > > > To me, I always see different opinions, ideas on comment of PR/issue > (most > > discussions are happening on PR/issue) whether they're strong or not, and > > most of them, eventually converged. I'd like to see it 'mature' than 'no > > disagreement'. > > > > And many different of features and improvements has been discussed and > > contributed from various people/organizations, most of them actually not > on > > the roadmap. Thats another form of diversity I can see from Zeppelin > > community. > > > > Although no one blocks post email or leave comment on any discussion, If > > we feel we need more diversity of view point, we can always improve it by > > explicitly encourage participating discussion from Zeppelin's > contribution > > guide, or by any other way. > > > > [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#pmc > > [2] http://markmail.org/message/5l5hsygvntcx5fqb > > < > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201507.mbox/%3c20150721204853.gg28...@boudnik.org%3E > > > > > > Thanks, > > moon > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:56 AM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > > wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Amos Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > The one that is a graduation issue, concerns the diversity of the PMC, > >> and > >> > whether graduation is being rushed. The project still is largely > >> centered > >> > around one individual and company. > >> > >> FWIW: the diversity requirements around company affiliation have been, > >> if not de-emphasized, but made at least less of a concern in the past > few > >> years. Search for emails from Roy Fielding on that subject. > >> > >> Another concern that you are raising -- the lack of diversity of view > >> points > >> is quite real in my opinion. > >> > >> > As another example, I don't think we ever discussed what to do about > >> having > >> > fallen behind the roadmap. Instead of looking at how to get to meet > our > >> > standard, we adjusted the standard. > >> > >> That is, also, strictly speaking not a problem. Interest in projects > >> waxes and wanes > >> all the time. ASF is not a commercial entity -- we're a bunch of > >> volunteers and > >> lulls are to be excepted. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Roman. > >> > > >
