Re: Apache Way talks
On 16 February 2015 at 16:51, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote: I think that's exactly it. If we write policy down it becomes a rule. Huh? Written policy only becomes a rule if the document declares it as such - or perhaps, fails to declare it as policy. There seem to be a lot of unwritten rules and unwritten policy in the ASF. I think this is why there are so many arguments about what is absolutely required and what is best practice. Also that some rules are stated without providing the rationale. Rules work great when every environment is the same, but that's not the real world. That suggests that rules are completely unnecessary. I don't believe that is the case. It ought to be possible to start from a strict requirement - for example, being able to establish provenance of code - and derive some fundamental rules from that. If a rule is stated without any background, it just becomes something to argue over, and edge cases are more difficult to resolve. Whereas if the rationale for a rule is documented, edge cases can be checked against the rationale. We do, as a group of individuals, have the tendency to assume the way things are done in project Foo is the entirety of The Apache Way. In fact what is done in Foo is a superset of the Apache Way, designed for that specific project. Consider Committer = PMC for example. The Apache Way only says that both groups should be merit based (I.e. no cabals or BD). It says nothing about what the merit levels are or whether they should be the same or different for each group. Yet, somehow, many people will express their experience as being an immutable part of the Apache Way. Individual experience should help inform other community members, but it shouldn't restrict them. Ross Sent from my Windows Phone From: jan imailto:j...@apache.org Sent: 2/16/2015 8:43 AM To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Way talks s On 16 February 2015 at 17:21, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote: I agree Joe, We only have a very few immutable rules. Everything else is policy. As long as policy don't break those immutable rules the they can shift and change as much as they need to in order to empower individual project communities. Coincidentally I wrote a presentation on this very topic last night. I'll look to share it once it has been delivered, but too late for me to add to the CFP. I agree with you both.only being a relative new member, it is often quite hard to see what is official policy and what is just the opinion of some members. The rules are clear, and in my opinion, protect our values. Maybe we are back in another old discussion, that some of our policies are not defined, but merely we use to do. rgds jan I. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Joe Brockmeiermailto:j...@zonker.net Sent: 2/16/2015 8:01 AM To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Way talks On Sat, Feb 14, 2015, at 01:38 PM, jan i wrote: I have a feeling that we are standing at a crossroad where many questions like Directd funding, ApacheCON, entry ticket to ASF (Incubator/pTLP) tear us apart, and I believe it is high time the members of ASF take a stand (whatever it may be), and show we are ONE united in the APACHE WAY. I'm not sure directed funding, handling ApacheCon, etc. are immutable or define The Apache Way. We can allow (or not) directed funding and still practice community over code, merit, openness, etc. The fact that a large and diverse membership do not agree on these issues need not tear us apart if we can discuss and resolve issues without animosity. If we agree that community over code is one of the defining aspects of Apache, surely we can also agree that the community is also more important than folks having their way over whether or not Apache allows (or experiments with) directed funding or other models of promoting/sustaining projects and their infrastructure. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
RE: Apache Way talks
I agree Joe, We only have a very few immutable rules. Everything else is policy. As long as policy don't break those immutable rules the they can shift and change as much as they need to in order to empower individual project communities. Coincidentally I wrote a presentation on this very topic last night. I'll look to share it once it has been delivered, but too late for me to add to the CFP. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Joe Brockmeiermailto:j...@zonker.net Sent: 2/16/2015 8:01 AM To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Way talks On Sat, Feb 14, 2015, at 01:38 PM, jan i wrote: I have a feeling that we are standing at a crossroad where many questions like Directd funding, ApacheCON, entry ticket to ASF (Incubator/pTLP) tear us apart, and I believe it is high time the members of ASF take a stand (whatever it may be), and show we are ONE united in the APACHE WAY. I'm not sure directed funding, handling ApacheCon, etc. are immutable or define The Apache Way. We can allow (or not) directed funding and still practice community over code, merit, openness, etc. The fact that a large and diverse membership do not agree on these issues need not tear us apart if we can discuss and resolve issues without animosity. If we agree that community over code is one of the defining aspects of Apache, surely we can also agree that the community is also more important than folks having their way over whether or not Apache allows (or experiments with) directed funding or other models of promoting/sustaining projects and their infrastructure. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Apache Way talks
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015, at 01:38 PM, jan i wrote: I have a feeling that we are standing at a crossroad where many questions like Directd funding, ApacheCON, entry ticket to ASF (Incubator/pTLP) tear us apart, and I believe it is high time the members of ASF take a stand (whatever it may be), and show we are ONE united in the APACHE WAY. I'm not sure directed funding, handling ApacheCon, etc. are immutable or define The Apache Way. We can allow (or not) directed funding and still practice community over code, merit, openness, etc. The fact that a large and diverse membership do not agree on these issues need not tear us apart if we can discuss and resolve issues without animosity. If we agree that community over code is one of the defining aspects of Apache, surely we can also agree that the community is also more important than folks having their way over whether or not Apache allows (or experiments with) directed funding or other models of promoting/sustaining projects and their infrastructure. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
RE: Knowing which talks are already claimed by another ApacheCon track?
Yep. I've added some such comments, but got frustrated with the only CFP so am now working in a spreadsheet you can't see (sorry). If you see my name in a owning comment drop me a mail and we can talk about which track it fits best. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Nick Burchmailto:n...@apache.org Sent: 2/16/2015 8:50 AM To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org Subject: Knowing which talks are already claimed by another ApacheCon track? Hi All I'm trying to finalise the Content Technologies track for Austin, but I'm struggling to know which talks have already been claimed by other tracks. Some of the ones I want to include have review comments which suggest they might have been, and some I'd just guess might be. I can't seem to see anything conclusive in the review app though. For the ones overlapping with ScienceHealthcare, I'm getting round this by having the chair of that track just mark up my google doc spreadsheet with the talks he's already claimed, which just-about works but may not scale! Is there a more general way I can see what other track chairs are planning to take? (If not, I can just send my list of talks, and hope for the best...) Thanks Nick
Knowing which talks are already claimed by another ApacheCon track?
Hi All I'm trying to finalise the Content Technologies track for Austin, but I'm struggling to know which talks have already been claimed by other tracks. Some of the ones I want to include have review comments which suggest they might have been, and some I'd just guess might be. I can't seem to see anything conclusive in the review app though. For the ones overlapping with ScienceHealthcare, I'm getting round this by having the chair of that track just mark up my google doc spreadsheet with the talks he's already claimed, which just-about works but may not scale! Is there a more general way I can see what other track chairs are planning to take? (If not, I can just send my list of talks, and hope for the best...) Thanks Nick
RE: Apache Way talks
I didn't intend to say *all* rules are unnecessary. I said we have very few necessary rules. I didn't intend to say policy *is* rule, I said it is interpreted as rule. Ross Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation -Original Message- From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 9:50 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Way talks On 16 February 2015 at 16:51, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote: I think that's exactly it. If we write policy down it becomes a rule. Huh? Written policy only becomes a rule if the document declares it as such - or perhaps, fails to declare it as policy. There seem to be a lot of unwritten rules and unwritten policy in the ASF. I think this is why there are so many arguments about what is absolutely required and what is best practice. Also that some rules are stated without providing the rationale. Rules work great when every environment is the same, but that's not the real world. That suggests that rules are completely unnecessary. I don't believe that is the case. It ought to be possible to start from a strict requirement - for example, being able to establish provenance of code - and derive some fundamental rules from that. If a rule is stated without any background, it just becomes something to argue over, and edge cases are more difficult to resolve. Whereas if the rationale for a rule is documented, edge cases can be checked against the rationale. We do, as a group of individuals, have the tendency to assume the way things are done in project Foo is the entirety of The Apache Way. In fact what is done in Foo is a superset of the Apache Way, designed for that specific project. Consider Committer = PMC for example. The Apache Way only says that both groups should be merit based (I.e. no cabals or BD). It says nothing about what the merit levels are or whether they should be the same or different for each group. Yet, somehow, many people will express their experience as being an immutable part of the Apache Way. Individual experience should help inform other community members, but it shouldn't restrict them. Ross Sent from my Windows Phone From: jan imailto:j...@apache.org Sent: 2/16/2015 8:43 AM To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Way talks s On 16 February 2015 at 17:21, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote: I agree Joe, We only have a very few immutable rules. Everything else is policy. As long as policy don't break those immutable rules the they can shift and change as much as they need to in order to empower individual project communities. Coincidentally I wrote a presentation on this very topic last night. I'll look to share it once it has been delivered, but too late for me to add to the CFP. I agree with you both.only being a relative new member, it is often quite hard to see what is official policy and what is just the opinion of some members. The rules are clear, and in my opinion, protect our values. Maybe we are back in another old discussion, that some of our policies are not defined, but merely we use to do. rgds jan I. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Joe Brockmeiermailto:j...@zonker.net Sent: 2/16/2015 8:01 AM To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Way talks On Sat, Feb 14, 2015, at 01:38 PM, jan i wrote: I have a feeling that we are standing at a crossroad where many questions like Directd funding, ApacheCON, entry ticket to ASF (Incubator/pTLP) tear us apart, and I believe it is high time the members of ASF take a stand (whatever it may be), and show we are ONE united in the APACHE WAY. I'm not sure directed funding, handling ApacheCon, etc. are immutable or define The Apache Way. We can allow (or not) directed funding and still practice community over code, merit, openness, etc. The fact that a large and diverse membership do not agree on these issues need not tear us apart if we can discuss and resolve issues without animosity. If we agree that community over code is one of the defining aspects of Apache, surely we can also agree that the community is also more important than folks having their way over whether or not Apache allows (or experiments with) directed funding or other models of promoting/sustaining projects and their infrastructure. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Fast Feather Track - anyone want to take charge for Austin?
On 16 February 2015 at 20:38, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com wrote: On 02/16/2015 12:06 PM, jan i wrote: Hi No response here, so I assume the FFT will be covered by Nick. My impression was that he was saying that he was *not* doing it, and was looking for a replacement. So was mine, but I have received a private mail, with a different story, so I guess we will hear more. I have tried to make a editor track and a small projects track, but it is very difficult to see which talks are open and how the PMCs look at them. We miss people who review the general parts (meaning not the big tracks). Looks at the moment as if I will have some extra time to spare at ACNA, unless I/We find a way of defining tracks for the not big, not top pick projects. rgds jan I. rgds jan i. On 13 February 2015 at 12:48, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 12 February 2015 at 23:23, Nick Burch n...@apache.org wrote: Hi All Hopefully most of you will know about the Fast Feather Track? For those who don't, it's often described as: a series of short talks, 10-20 minutes in length, covering things that are new / interesting / exciting / incubating / recently changed / etc. It's a great chance to learn about what's hot, what's new, and what's coming soon! Whether that's a new project entering the incubator, something shortly to graduate, or an amazing new area of technology that'll change everything when it's done, the Fast Feather Track is the place for it! It tends to be a mixture of people having their first chance of speaking at ApacheCon, and old-hands talking about the fun new thing that has got them all excited once more. As such, it's an important source of practice for new speakers (many of whom go on to give great full talks the session after), and a chance for more experience ASFers in the audience to learn about interesting new things in a friendly small space. (There have also been bigger FFT sessions during lunches, where more experienced speakers spoke to a bigger audience about fun/new/interesting stuff, which has worked well as and when the lunch setup permits it) A few years ago, I made the mistake of asking the then ApacheCon conference committee what was happening with the Fast Feather track that event, and somehow landed up running it then, and for some time to come... However, I worry that I might've been organising it too long, and so I'd like to offer it up in case someone else fancies taking over running it for Austin? no way you do a good job, you have the experience. It is not so easy to loose something you do well. Organisational wise, it isn't too much work. You need to write a little bit about what you want in the track and who should submit (plenty of examples on the wiki! Just search within http://wiki.apache.org/ apachecon ). Then you just setup a form / google doc / etc to collect session proposals, put out the word to potential speakers (pmcs@, general@i.a.o , twitter etc), notify whoever you want to have, tell the LF what space you need, turn up and learn lots of new fun things! :) So, anyone fancy trying their hand at conference organising with a nice small, easily manageable, fun mini-track thing? Fast Feather needs you! Well if you really want to give it up, I could offer to be point on FFT; provided you promise to help behind the scenes (e.g. convincing the grey beards to participate). It of course need to be coordinated with my TAC work on site, but that should be possible. rgds jan i. Nick -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Knowing which talks are already claimed by another ApacheCon track?
On 02/16/2015 11:49 AM, Nick Burch wrote: Hi All I'm trying to finalise the Content Technologies track for Austin, but I'm struggling to know which talks have already been claimed by other tracks. Some of the ones I want to include have review comments which suggest they might have been, and some I'd just guess might be. I can't seem to see anything conclusive in the review app though. For the ones overlapping with ScienceHealthcare, I'm getting round this by having the chair of that track just mark up my google doc spreadsheet with the talks he's already claimed, which just-about works but may not scale! Is there a more general way I can see what other track chairs are planning to take? (If not, I can just send my list of talks, and hope for the best...) Yeah, that's why I've asked folks to post their proposed tracks here -- because there's no good way to do this in the CFP itself. I hope that by the next event there will be a track chair access level, where people can claim tracks. Better yet, if we can persuade LF to open source the CFP system ... -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: [ApacheCon NA 2015] Proposed tracks Community + Containers
Thanks Joe, if you don't mind I'd like to hold on the container track. I'm putting together a larger group of cloud tracks and trying to weave a narrative through the whole thing. This includes containers. The good news is you and I mostly agree on the valuable container related talks are. I'll ensure I align your track below with my own ideas. Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation -Original Message- From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:j...@zonker.net] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 11:30 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: [ApacheCon NA 2015] Proposed tracks Community + Containers Hey all, Have gone through talks in the CfP and here's what I'd like for the Community Track and then a proposed Container Track: Community Track --- The Apache Way with Kids: Using Community over Code in the First Robotics Competition,Bob Paulin From the Incubator to TLP: a case study of community metrics for Apache Aurora and Apache Mesos,David Lester RTFM? Write a Better FM!,Rich Bowen Get more out of GSoC opportunities: A Win-Win for both Projects and Students,Suresh Marru But We're Already Open Source! Why Would I Want To Bring My Code To Apache?,Nick Burch Apache Incubator: where it is coming from and where it is going,Roman Shaposhnik Container Track: --- Using Apache Brooklyn and Docker to simulate your production environments in the Cloud,Andrew Kennedy Deploy in scale with Docker, CoreOS, Kubernetes and Apache Stratos,Lakmal Warusawithana Building Clustered Applications with Kubernetes and Docker,Stephen Watt Using Docker for Development of Production Systems based on OfBiz,Adam Heath Elastic Compute for batch platform using Apache Mesos, Docker,Muralidhar Sortur How to create a Docker cloud with Brooklyn, jclouds, and Clocker,Andrea Turli # # # I have a few backups if the first set aren't available. These are my top choices of the talks submitted. However, I think we have a bit of a gap on the container side with no introductory Docker/Container talks. Pretty sure that there's still a lot of folks that might attend ApacheCon who are not fully grounded in the technology. Thoughts, comments, flames? BTW - I'm hoping to attend ApacheCon, but I may have a team meeting that conflicts. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Apache Way talks
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015, at 10:21 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: I agree Joe, We only have a very few immutable rules. Everything else is policy. As long as policy don't break those immutable rules the they can shift and change as much as they need to in order to empower individual project communities. Coincidentally I wrote a presentation on this very topic last night. I'll look to share it once it has been delivered, but too late for me to add to the CFP. If this might be something for the community track, I think we can be fungible on CfP deadline... Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @jzb http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Fast Feather Track - anyone want to take charge for Austin?
On 02/16/2015 12:06 PM, jan i wrote: Hi No response here, so I assume the FFT will be covered by Nick. My impression was that he was saying that he was *not* doing it, and was looking for a replacement. rgds jan i. On 13 February 2015 at 12:48, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 12 February 2015 at 23:23, Nick Burch n...@apache.org wrote: Hi All Hopefully most of you will know about the Fast Feather Track? For those who don't, it's often described as: a series of short talks, 10-20 minutes in length, covering things that are new / interesting / exciting / incubating / recently changed / etc. It's a great chance to learn about what's hot, what's new, and what's coming soon! Whether that's a new project entering the incubator, something shortly to graduate, or an amazing new area of technology that'll change everything when it's done, the Fast Feather Track is the place for it! It tends to be a mixture of people having their first chance of speaking at ApacheCon, and old-hands talking about the fun new thing that has got them all excited once more. As such, it's an important source of practice for new speakers (many of whom go on to give great full talks the session after), and a chance for more experience ASFers in the audience to learn about interesting new things in a friendly small space. (There have also been bigger FFT sessions during lunches, where more experienced speakers spoke to a bigger audience about fun/new/interesting stuff, which has worked well as and when the lunch setup permits it) A few years ago, I made the mistake of asking the then ApacheCon conference committee what was happening with the Fast Feather track that event, and somehow landed up running it then, and for some time to come... However, I worry that I might've been organising it too long, and so I'd like to offer it up in case someone else fancies taking over running it for Austin? no way you do a good job, you have the experience. It is not so easy to loose something you do well. Organisational wise, it isn't too much work. You need to write a little bit about what you want in the track and who should submit (plenty of examples on the wiki! Just search within http://wiki.apache.org/apachecon ). Then you just setup a form / google doc / etc to collect session proposals, put out the word to potential speakers (pmcs@, general@i.a.o, twitter etc), notify whoever you want to have, tell the LF what space you need, turn up and learn lots of new fun things! :) So, anyone fancy trying their hand at conference organising with a nice small, easily manageable, fun mini-track thing? Fast Feather needs you! Well if you really want to give it up, I could offer to be point on FFT; provided you promise to help behind the scenes (e.g. convincing the grey beards to participate). It of course need to be coordinated with my TAC work on site, but that should be possible. rgds jan i. Nick -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: Knowing which talks are already claimed by another ApacheCon track?
It's probably best we start an online doc somewhere... Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation -Original Message- From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 12:29 PM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Knowing which talks are already claimed by another ApacheCon track? On 02/16/2015 11:49 AM, Nick Burch wrote: Hi All I'm trying to finalise the Content Technologies track for Austin, but I'm struggling to know which talks have already been claimed by other tracks. Some of the ones I want to include have review comments which suggest they might have been, and some I'd just guess might be. I can't seem to see anything conclusive in the review app though. For the ones overlapping with ScienceHealthcare, I'm getting round this by having the chair of that track just mark up my google doc spreadsheet with the talks he's already claimed, which just-about works but may not scale! Is there a more general way I can see what other track chairs are planning to take? (If not, I can just send my list of talks, and hope for the best...) Yeah, that's why I've asked folks to post their proposed tracks here -- because there's no good way to do this in the CFP itself. I hope that by the next event there will be a track chair access level, where people can claim tracks. Better yet, if we can persuade LF to open source the CFP system ... -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: A maturity model for Apache projects
On 1/20/15 9:02 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: Hi Justin, On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com wrote: ...Perhaps change CD10 to this? The project produces royalty free Open Source software for distribution to the public at no charge is straight from the from the ASF Bylaws at http://apache.org/foundation/bylaws.html so I'm not keen on changing that. I have added a footnote to CD10 that explains this, and added http://opensource.org/osd to the list of links at the end of the page. Does that work for you? -Bertrand A longer explanation of this point, which I use frequently: https://www.apache.org/free/ Thanks Bertrand for keeping this fairly generic, while still being clear that it is clearly the Apache model, not a completely general one. - Shane
