Folks,

Really, after the first round of discussions on this subject, I didn't think
that Mahout was a viable target. There just isn't a good alignment. However,
when I over-summarized that discussion in an email to the members list,
Grant called me on it. So I felt that I should trot it by one more time.
It's really fine to reach the same conclusion.

--benson


On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote:

> For parking status, labs or even google code seem appropriate.
>
> I am not as unconvinced by the procedural arguments as Grant, but I do
> worry
> that there isn't either a consumer or a committed champion for the code.
> That combined with the language gap would lead me to expect the code to be
> pretty much orphaned.  If that happens, I doubt that there is any advantage
> to having the code in Mahout for either side.
>
> I DO think that the code is an important resource to preserve one way or
> another.
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > Grant,
> >
> > As someone who was given committer status on a project in a nonstandard
> > way,
> > I have, perhaps, more flexible morals about the principles than you do.
> But
> > I certainly have no intent to try to convince you that Mahout should
> > deviate
> > from normal community procedures if you are not so inclined.
> >
> > This is a high-speed implementation of
> > http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/J/J92/J92-4003.pdf. Both Brown and Mercer are
> on
> > the author list.
> >
> > Yes, the author is not I. He works with me.
> >
> > It may be that the best solution here is for me to park it at the labs
> > using
> > my status, and act as Jethran's agent. That would be a lot less work than
> > teeing it up here, and I think that lazyness will win the day here.
> >
> > --benson
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > >
> > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > > > We have the MI cluster code to contribute. It has been suggested that
> > > > labs.apache.org might be a good target. However, topic-wise, Mahout
> > > would
> > > > make more sense.
> > > >
> > > > This poses two questions. 1) Does Mahout want the (small) distraction
> > of
> > > > this at the moment? 2) Is the PMC willing to do something a little
> > > > out-of-the-ordinary with committer privs, as I'll explain below.
> > > >
> > > > to quote: "Apache Labs was established to provide a place where
> trusted
> > > > individuals can innovate without the burden of community building,
> with
> > > the
> > > > comfort of the apache infrastructure and remaining close to their
> > peers,
> > > > making it easier to get feedback and seeding new potential incubator
> > > > podlings."
> > > >
> > > > I think that I can make a strong case for the author as being
> > trustworthy
> > > at
> > > > labs. I'm reasonably sure that I can make a case for *myself*, at
> > least,
> > > in
> > > > a pinch. On the other hand, I don't think it's viable to expect him
> to
> > > > become a committer at Mahout via the usual process, and I'm not
> > > comfortable
> > > > with contributing the code and not ending up with commit rights.
> > >
> > > You know how the ASF works.  Merit is earned.  Many of us started out
> > > making contributions w/o said right, trusting that if we keep it up, we
> > will
> > > be made committers.
> > >
> > >
> > > > And I'm
> > > > just not finding the time to lend enough assistance here to have much
> > > chance
> > > > of becoming a committer.
> > > >
> > > > So, I'm thinking that labs is the right path, but I wanted to give
> the
> > > > Mahout community a chance to think about it first.
> > >
> > > Labs is all about existing committers.  There is no "convince labs to
> > make
> > > [the author] a committer.", AIU how labs works.  Please confirm on the
> > labs
> > > mailing list.  I also don't know if Labs handles "donations" of
> complete
> > > code.  Of course, you probably could do it on labs, but that means you
> > are
> > > the committer.  The ASF doesn't like proxy committers, either.
> > >
> > > While I very much think this code is in line with Mahout and would love
> > to
> > > see it here (I especially think it fits under the "Mahout as a TLP"
> > model,
> > > which hopefully will happen sometime in '10), I think we need to know
> > more
> > > about it.  My suggestion would be for the author (from the sounds of
> it,
> > > it's not you) put up a patch that integrates it with Mahout (likely
> just
> > the
> > > build system or tree structure) and demonstrates knowledge of how open
> > > source and the ASF work by seeing the patch through to committal by one
> > of
> > > the existing committers.  Doing so would also suggest that they can
> speak
> > > for themselves, which doesn't appear to be the case so far.  Given
> > > reasonable proof of that, which should be pretty easy to do if the
> author
> > is
> > > really serious about maintaining the code and being a part of Mahout,
> > > committership should follow shortly.  In some cases, the PMC has voted
> to
> > > add people along with a donation (Sean and Taste for example, which was
> a
> > > major donation, including a Software Grant), but it is not something we
> > > necessarily do outright, otherwise everyone would be petitioning for
> it.
> >  In
> > > the case of Taste, it was already out in open source (SourceForge), had
> > an
> > > established community which Sean had built and it was clear that Sean
> > knew
> > > what being a part of an open source community meant.
> > >
> > > Hope this helps.  I do think it would be useful to have in Mahout, but
> > I'd
> > > like to hear more.
> > >
> > > -Grant
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ted Dunning, CTO
> DeepDyve
>

Reply via email to