Dwarka, Abhishek, Can one of you please responds to Max’s email below? I am not familiar enough with the state of CNC and Samsung’s future plans (if any) need to be considered before we hand maintainer for Cloud to another team. Please provide your comment as soon as possible so we can proceed.
Thanks, Nathan From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Max Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 12:07 PM To: Ondrej Tomcik <ondrej.tom...@kistler.com>; Dwarkaprasad Dayama (dwarka.day...@samsung.com) <dwarka.day...@samsung.com>; firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [dev] Cloud maintainers Hi, I hope we can nominate Ondrej as a new maintainer really soon. Whatever are the reasons for the lack of activity of the current maintainers being listed, we need a solution. We also started making patches on our own, to overcome bugs and issues. This is a very bad situation for all of us who believe in open source projects. Regards Max Max Kholmyansky Software Architect - SURE Universal Ltd. http://www.sureuniversal.com<http://www.sureuniversal.com/> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Ondrej Tomcik <ondrej.tom...@kistler.com<mailto:ondrej.tom...@kistler.com>> wrote: Dear devs, A month ago I started the discussion regarding the cloud project maintainers. Short summary: • Cloud is not maintained from release 1.3.0 • Cloud maintainers are not replying to messages • Further development, roadmap – missing In Apr 24 and May 30 I issued 2 merge requests from our patch repository. These are just the smallest and easiest ones. I didn’t receive any comment, nor message. Don’t know how else should I point to the inactivity in this subproject. My proposal is to take over the cloud subproject. I would like to nominate myself as the maintainer and Peter Rafaj and Jozef Kralik as sub-maintainers. These guys are from the Kistler Instrumente AG – OCF member. Our goal would be to: • Stabilize current solution with our patches • Propose new scalable design fully compliant to the OCF Native Cloud Specification to the community • Implementation of the OCF Native Cloud @Dwarka what are the next steps? Thanks a lot. Ondrej Tomcik :: KISTLER :: measure, analyze, inovate From: Macieira, Thiago [mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com>] Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 9:14 PM To: Tomcik Ondrej; Uze Choi Subject: RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers Start discussions in the ML about your objectives and start sending code. The maintainer has reported he’s still present so he’ll either review your submissions and participate in the discussion, or we’ll have to proceed to replace with someone who will (could be you). From: Ondrej Tomcik <ondrej.tom...@kistler.com<mailto:ondrej.tom...@kistler.com>> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 7:21 AM To: Uze Choi <uzc...@samsung.com<mailto:uzc...@samsung.com>>; Macieira, Thiago <thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com>> Subject: RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers Hello Uze, Thiago, Now I am bit puzzled what are the next steps. What is your opinion? BR Ondrej Tomcik :: KISTLER :: measure, analyze, inovate From: Tomcik Ondrej Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:23 AM To: 'jihyeok13....@samsung.com<mailto:jihyeok13....@samsung.com>'; Uze Choi; thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com> Cc: Daniel Park; Peter Moonki Hong Subject: RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers Hello. We (Kistler Instrumente AG) would welcome an option to maintain and develop further IoTivity Cloud, together with other contributors who are interested. We have experts in the company as we are already building highly available and distributed systems. That’s why we need to enable the IoTivity to be highly available and scalable as well, as it is technology and standard we have chosen. Thanks Ondrej Tomcik :: KISTLER :: measure, analyze, inovate From: Jee Hyeok Kim [mailto:jihyeok13....@samsung.com] Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 8:56 AM To: Tomcik Ondrej; Uze Choi; thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com> Cc: Daniel Park; Peter Moonki Hong Subject: RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers Hello Ondrej, Thank you for your advice and sorry about my irresponsible attitude. I realized that important part of cloud feature is High Availability and Scalibility where IoTivity Cloud doesn't have. To achive that cloud needs to be redesigned from bottom to top and need many expert's conrtibution where we are not ready for that. (That's reason we can not go further on current cloud implementation) So my proposition is bring new well-known/concrete basement and add OCF specific features. I'm sorry little bit late to response your message, hard to answer and also make direction. Any other opinions are welcome. Best Regards JK --------- Original Message --------- Sender : Ondrej Tomcik <ondrej.tom...@kistler.com<mailto:ondrej.tom...@kistler.com>> Date : 2018-05-08 15:39 (GMT+9) Title : RE: Re: Cloud maintainers Hello JK, Tomorrow we have a meeting together with Scott, where we will discuss few aspects of IoTivity cloud redesign. I will provide you more information tomorrow guys. Long story short: High level design idea from Scott point of view is good. That’s how we want to go on. But: Scott’s idea is to get rid of current cloud project in the IoTivity Cloud and integrate it based on specification into the Mainflux. I am not convinced yet as the effort which is needed is huge and I don’t see BIG added value of this technology stack change. PoC of the IoTivity Cloud is a good base. It needs some redesign, but from an effort point of view it cannot be compared with Scott’s solution. So, I am still gathering more information to have a good basis for decision. A or B, or event C. We will make some proposals, discuss it also with CNCF group and Mainflux developers and decide. But my main question is, how is it with Samsung and current maintenance team of IoTivity Cloud Project? You’re often not responding – and you’re the only one from the team who will sometimes reply, and with big delay. There is no update of IoTivity cloud from release of 1.3.0. No roadmap is provided, no information is available. OCF Cloud WG is inactive. I am very surprised that this is accepted in an open source project. No offence, I believe that team is working on different project and is not allocated for this one, but that’s not how it should be from open source project point of view. Cloud Native Foundation, which is part of the Linux Foundation – same as IoTivity! is far forward. There is no communication between us (and as I said, we are both members of Linux Foundation!), we should be in a regular contact with them and provide CNCF enabled IoT project without discussion. OCF and IoTivity C/C++ part have future. It needs some impuls as well but it’s healthy. Cloud unfortunately not. My goal is clear, be part of CNCF projects, have more maintainers, not only from one company and provide OCF enabled cloud as IoTivity project. If it will be redesign of the current solution, or a new project, that’s not so important. That will be evaluated. By the way, I never asked. What is your opinion Uze, Thiago, Moonki about a current state of the IoTivity project in general? Is it healthy? Youtube -> IoTivity -> thanks to Thiago, PCoval and others, there were talks on conferences. In 2016. Now? BR Ondrej Tomcik :: KISTLER :: measure, analyze, inovate From: Jee Hyeok Kim [mailto:jihyeok13....@samsung.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 3:38 AM To: Tomcik Ondrej; Uze Choi; thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com> Cc: Daniel Park; Peter Moonki Hong Subject: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers Hello Ondrej, I'm really sorry not able to response and follow open-source also. We were holiday so I can answer today. I also read Scott's redesign concept and it is very good opportunity to change current POC to commercial ready. I'll check from my side that which approach is good for this case that create another project or re-use existing space. Can you share your opinion what is best for you ? Best Regards JK --------- Original Message --------- Sender : Ondrej Tomcik <ondrej.tom...@kistler.com<mailto:ondrej.tom...@kistler.com>> Date : 2018-05-05 02:35 (GMT+9) Title : Re: Cloud maintainers Hello gentlemen, Any update? I also want to ask you, was there any communication with CNCF or EdgeX? BR Ondrej On 2 May 2018, at 12:16, 최우제 (Uze Choi) <uzc...@samsung.com<mailto:uzc...@samsung.com>> wrote: Hi Ondrej, We reached the maintainer JK again. Please hold on. He might respond soon. BR, Uze Choi From: Ondrej Tomcik [mailto:ondrej.tom...@kistler.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:14 PM To: 최우제 (Uze Choi); thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com> Subject: Cloud maintainers Hello Uze, Thiago, I think there were no objections to change maintainers of IoTivity Cloud. Therefore, if you agree, I would propose to update the list. We also started discussion with Scott King and Max Kohlmyansky, and we will toghether prepare in case of new features/redesign concept and documentation, which I will present to relevant WGs before implementation. BR Ondrej Tomcik :: KISTLER :: measure, analyze, inovate [cid:image001.gif@01D4035D.F666C880] [http://ext.samsung.net/mail/ext/v1/external/status/update?userid=jihyeok13.kim&do=bWFpbElEPTIwMTgwNTEwMDY1NTM0ZXBjbXMxcDhkOTE2MWQxYjJhZTNkZjE4NTEyY2E5N2E2ZmU0NTQ2NSZyZWNpcGllbnRBZGRyZXNzPU9uZHJlai5Ub21jaWtAa2lzdGxlci5jb20_] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#9702): https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/message/9702 Mute This Topic: https://lists.iotivity.org/mt/20404834/21656 Group Owner: iotivity-dev+ow...@lists.iotivity.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-