[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16788396#comment-16788396 ] Sebb commented on INCUBATOR-231: [~wave] AIUI the entry in the DTD means that the value must be 1 or 2 or 3, so I think the DTD is correct. See [1] for sample failed job. I saw the Comdev thread. [~jmclean] Does your editor support the DTD? But I agree that it would be better to use an app to update the data. It could do other useful stuff like try and keep the group numbers roughly even. [1] [https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/bf1dbeed097eb07be02f77daab7bba956b0610030b73bd7e9f86a690@%3Cnotifications.whimsical.apache.org%3E] > Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website > --- > > Key: INCUBATOR-231 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231 > Project: Incubator > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz >Priority: Major > Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt, > gitbox.svn.diff.txt > > > [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from > [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project > pages) are still maintained under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/] > We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders > in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid > confusion. > Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is > duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to > clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows, > while preserving history where it makes sense. > There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] , > not sure if that's used or useful. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16788384#comment-16788384 ] Justin Mclean commented on INCUBATOR-231: - I need to edit the file every month to fix up podlings that need to report monthly, and new puddings edit it to add them selves - both of these tasks wouldn't be too hard to generate rather than hand editing. I use an editor that understand and validates the XML so that reduces the risk of making errors. > Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website > --- > > Key: INCUBATOR-231 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231 > Project: Incubator > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz >Priority: Major > Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt, > gitbox.svn.diff.txt > > > [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from > [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project > pages) are still maintained under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/] > We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders > in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid > confusion. > Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is > duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to > clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows, > while preserving history where it makes sense. > There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] , > not sure if that's used or useful. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16788383#comment-16788383
]
David Fisher commented on INCUBATOR-231:
[~s...@apache.org] Which whimsy job?
There is a podlings.dtd which has {{}}
Do you have an edit?
FYI on comdev there is a discussion about DOAP, security and other metadata.
Perhaps a $financed job.
I completely agree that somehow we need to allow whimsy to edit the
podlings.xml and then we generate the podling status files.
> Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
> ---
>
> Key: INCUBATOR-231
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231
> Project: Incubator
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt,
> gitbox.svn.diff.txt
>
>
> [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from
> [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project
> pages) are still maintained under
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/]
> We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders
> in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid
> confusion.
> Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is
> duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to
> clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows,
> while preserving history where it makes sense.
> There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] ,
> not sure if that's used or useful.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16788371#comment-16788371 ] Sebb commented on INCUBATOR-231: One of the Whimsy jobs that creates the public JSON files failed, because reporting group must be a single digit. I think there needs to be a way to test changes to the file before it is committed. A basic test would be to check for well-formed XML. It may be hard to check for errors in the data itself, although I think the DTD might have caught this particular error. Maybe there should be an app to do the editting? Similarly for other data files that need to be maintained. Might be a good GSOC task? Just a thought (I'm not volunteering as a mentor) > Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website > --- > > Key: INCUBATOR-231 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231 > Project: Incubator > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz >Priority: Major > Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt, > gitbox.svn.diff.txt > > > [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from > [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project > pages) are still maintained under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/] > We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders > in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid > confusion. > Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is > duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to > clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows, > while preserving history where it makes sense. > There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] , > not sure if that's used or useful. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r1855068 - /incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml
It’s actually a 1. No worries. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 8, 2019, at 3:00 PM, sebb AT ASF wrote: > > I 'fixed' the file because it was causing Whimsy errors. > > I may have got the group wrong, but I'm sure it's only supposed to be > a single digit. > > On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 22:57, wrote: >> >> Author: sebb >> Date: Fri Mar 8 22:57:57 2019 >> New Revision: 1855068 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1855068=rev >> Log: >> group must be a single digit; not sure 2 is correct >> >> Modified: >>incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml >> >> Modified: incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml >> URL: >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml?rev=1855068=1855067=1855068=diff >> == >> --- incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml [utf-8] (original) >> +++ incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml [utf-8] Fri Mar 8 22:57:57 >> 2019 >> @@ -2842,7 +2842,7 @@ >> >> > startdate="2019-03-06"> >> TVM is a full stack open deep learning compiler stack >> for CPUs, GPUs, and specialized accelerators. It aims to close the gap >> between the productivity-focused deep learning frameworks, and the >> performance- or efficiency-oriented hardware backends. >> -April, May, June >> +April, May, June >> Markus Weimer >> >> Byung-Gon Chun >> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cvs-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: cvs-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r1855068 - /incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml
I 'fixed' the file because it was causing Whimsy errors. I may have got the group wrong, but I'm sure it's only supposed to be a single digit. On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 22:57, wrote: > > Author: sebb > Date: Fri Mar 8 22:57:57 2019 > New Revision: 1855068 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1855068=rev > Log: > group must be a single digit; not sure 2 is correct > > Modified: > incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml > > Modified: incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml?rev=1855068=1855067=1855068=diff > == > --- incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml [utf-8] (original) > +++ incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml [utf-8] Fri Mar 8 22:57:57 > 2019 > @@ -2842,7 +2842,7 @@ > > startdate="2019-03-06"> > TVM is a full stack open deep learning compiler stack > for CPUs, GPUs, and specialized accelerators. It aims to close the gap > between the productivity-focused deep learning frameworks, and the > performance- or efficiency-oriented hardware backends. > -April, May, June > +April, May, June > Markus Weimer > > Byung-Gon Chun > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cvs-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: cvs-h...@incubator.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: A smaller IPMC
Hi - > IPMC membership has nothing to do with mentor engagement. > > If you are trying to diagnose mentorship, then you need to start over with > a mentorship discussion. If mentors participating at the IPMC don't > correlate to their mentor engagement with their podlings, that's something > to address. Changing the IPMC composition has no impact on such a problem. This is the focus we need. How do we serve podlings with so many seemingly unengaged, volunteer mentors? (1) Mentors are each podling community's guide to operating inside the Foundation as a whole. The goal is to get them fully ready to be a TLP with proper proven understanding of how to function within the ASF. (2) The Incubator spends a lot of time collecting reporting. The IPMC can measure much more about a Podling’s status and report back to the podling directly with actionable information including guidance that ties to Foundation guidance and resources. (3) We need to improve workflows. There is a master file called incubator/podlings.xml. The TVM addition to it this morning broke the file due to malformed XML. This is not the first time. This broke Whimsy’s Roster tool for the whole Foundation. I luckily have been working on the clutch process with respect to (2) and caught it quickly. (4) For example, the Infra team has done wonderful work on Gitbox and LDAP. The Whimsical team has as well. The IPMC needs to work to make our part much less fragile. Regards, Dave
Re: A smaller IPMC
Just to point out the obvious... On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 5:33 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Some suggestions: > 1. Ask all inactive IPMC if they want to continue being on the IPMC and > see who steps down. Being inactive they are probably not following this > list so we need to identify and send each one email them personally. > A good number of us have served multiple stints on the IPMC and as our focus changed, we've asked to be furloughed emeritus, and then sent asks to rejoin to actively mentor another incubation proposal. Often to be met by "Oh, you had left? We hadn't recorded that, so you are already still-here." I'm not sure I'd trust the current roster, and a refresh of "please express interest if you are still following the Incubator project" isn't a bad idea on a very infrequent basis. Resolving how to deal with those who don't respond at all (neither "please move me to emeritus" nor "I'm still here!" come across) is an exercise left to the IPMC who are paying attention, it doesn't need to be transacted on general@ (and would be a bit of an exercise in shaming if they tried.) 2. There were some questions around merit raised, remove all IPMC members > who were not on the initial proposal and who were voted in. Those left on > the IPMC vote back in those who are currently active. > So, those from the original IPMC formation are recalled in an inactive and largely unaware state, as the "impartial observers", to do what, exactly? Solve problems they haven't been following and can't offer solid prescriptions for? A more focused approach might be to suspend non-members from the IPMC for a reaffirmation vote if that group has caused significant issues, but I doubt that is a useful exercise (see comments that follow...) 3. Get rid of all IPMC members, and vote (with ASF members vote being > binding - not sure how else it could be done?) currently active ones back > in. > All members have generally been welcomed as volunteer participants at the Incubator. If you want something at this scale, I'd suggest you need to scale it similarly to the board of directors. Fixed number of seats, membership-wide voting under STV. Or ad-hoc number of participants, up/down votes on individuals, which are effectively assured to all be accepted, rendering the entire activity useless. In respect to non-Member nominees, I'd suggest anyone participating at the IPMC level, not an ASF member, and not nominated now for ASF membership should receive very close scrutiny. One of two mistakes has occurred in those cases, and either mistake is a cause for concern and reflects poorly on the IPMC. > 4. Do nothing as this is not actually a problem but instead address other > underlying issues. e.g. lack of mentor engagement. > IPMC membership has nothing to do with mentor engagement. If you are trying to diagnose mentorship, then you need to start over with a mentorship discussion. If mentors participating at the IPMC don't correlate to their mentor engagement with their podlings, that's something to address. Changing the IPMC composition has no impact on such a problem.
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16788249#comment-16788249 ] David Fisher commented on INCUBATOR-231: Interesting event just now as someone added a new podling - TVM and messed up the XML. I fixed it and Whimsy is working. I did find some debug cases with the new project ldap and gitbox repos processing. Two new error messages :-) > Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website > --- > > Key: INCUBATOR-231 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231 > Project: Incubator > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz >Priority: Major > Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt, > gitbox.svn.diff.txt > > > [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from > [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project > pages) are still maintained under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/] > We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders > in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid > confusion. > Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is > duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to > clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows, > while preserving history where it makes sense. > There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] , > not sure if that's used or useful. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16788005#comment-16788005 ] David Fisher commented on INCUBATOR-231: I may decide to move this work to new scripts, clutch directory and reporting so that: # Others can help # The current method is not disrupted # Reporting will need to be reworked for Confluence Wiki > Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website > --- > > Key: INCUBATOR-231 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231 > Project: Incubator > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz >Priority: Major > Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt, > gitbox.svn.diff.txt > > > [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from > [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project > pages) are still maintained under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/] > We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders > in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid > confusion. > Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is > duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to > clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows, > while preserving history where it makes sense. > There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at > [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] , > not sure if that's used or useful. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16787985#comment-16787985
]
David Fisher commented on INCUBATOR-231:
We could, but it will need to be more than the pickle that needs checking.
{{clutch.pkl}} is input to the reporter functions.
In {{content/clutch/}} these html website sections are also generated:
{{clutchm.ent, clutchmy.ent, clutcho1.ent, clutcho2.ent, clutchr1.ent,
clutchr2.ent, clutcht.ent}}. Plus these text files: {{clutch.txt,
report_due_1.txt, report_due_2.txt, report_due_3.txt}}
Whimsy and Gitbox provide good LDAP and Git repository information.
{{PROJECT_LDAP = "https://whimsy.apache.org/public/public_ldap_projects.json"}}
{{GITBOX_DIR = "https://gitbox.apache.org/repositories.json"}}
I see that real improvements in workflow and reporting based on finding out
what is actually happening.
The clutch can do more to help identify the real status of all of the podlings.
I've added the following key to each podling's dictionary in the pickle:
{{'fixMeList': ['INFO: training: Does not yet have a website','INFO: training:
Does not yet have a distribution area']}}
I'm working on the language. I feel that we can generate a strong self
documenting status page that can both generate each podling's report to be
enhanced by the podling and help podling's self serve.
> Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
> ---
>
> Key: INCUBATOR-231
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231
> Project: Incubator
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt,
> gitbox.svn.diff.txt
>
>
> [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from
> [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project
> pages) are still maintained under
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/]
> We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders
> in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid
> confusion.
> Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is
> duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to
> clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows,
> while preserving history where it makes sense.
> There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] ,
> not sure if that's used or useful.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: A smaller IPMC
Hi Ted, Maybe I missed somethings totally, but I intended to express my preference about restructuring of IPMC, not PPMCs: - Keep only people as IPMC members who can really guide, recruit and review graduations based on their merits shown in the past in this specific community; - Keep active mentors as "mentors", like "committers" in other projects with no binding votes, but more focused on helping podlings with details and providing enough info and overview to IPMC. - No automatic IPMC membership for ASF members without voting based on their merit in this "incubation" community. There are concerns in detail, such as how to get 3+ votes in the releases of podlings that are not close to graduation if mentors don't have binding votes, how to recognize mentoring contributions from new faces, etc. Ideas in other threads flow here and there. If IPMC members are more focused on high-level guidances and reviews, it should work based on active mentors' helps. Anyway, the above is my personal preference. It seems fairer to me than today: when podlings get reviews, voting, and guidances from IPMC; when mentors work hard to get a podling graduated standing between a podling and IPMC; when a mentor is recognized and invited to IPMC by the incubation community for their mentoring contributions; when more dedicated IPMC members review and cast binding vote with more responsible feedbacks; when people watch, participate in the lists considering to help podlings in various ways possibly hoping to be a mentor (committer) someday. Regards, Woonsan On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 10:49 PM Ted Dunning wrote: > > Woonsan > > I think that there may be some cross-talk between discussions. This latest > discussion was about the Ipmc ,not about the podling PMCs. > > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 6:27 PM Woonsan Ko wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 6:33 PM Justin Mclean > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > It’s been suggested that the IPMC is too large, what do other IPMC > > members think might be a way to address this? > > > > > > Please discuss and indicate +1 what you would think would help, you can > > vote for more than one. > > > > > > Some suggestions: > > > 1. Ask all inactive IPMC if they want to continue being on the IPMC and > > see who steps down. Being inactive they are probably not following this > > list so we need to identify and send each one email them personally. > > > 2. There were some questions around merit raised, remove all IPMC > > members who were not on the initial proposal and who were voted in. Those > > left on the IPMC vote back in those who are currently active. > > > 3. Get rid of all IPMC members, and vote (with ASF members vote being > > binding - not sure how else it could be done?) currently active ones back > > in. > > > 4. Do nothing as this is not actually a problem but instead address > > other underlying issues. e.g. lack of mentor engagement. > > > > +1 to my modified version from #2 (and 0 to the others as I don't > > think they will help a lot): > > "Remove all IPMC members who were not on the initial proposal and who > > were voted in. Those left on the IPMC vote for those, as members, who > > can recruit, guide mentors, and review podling graduations, and they > > also vote for those, as mentors (committers), who have ever been > > active mentors for podlings." > > > > Mentors are committers: if someone starts contributing in this > > community, they are to be recognized and invited to a mentor > > (committer) in this project; if they contribute more for the community > > consistently, they are to be invited to a IPMC member. In smaller > > IPMC, IPMC members focus more on helping/guiding mentors and reviewing > > graduations in various aspects, and mentors focus more on detail > > issues in podlings, providing enough overview and information to IPMC. > > I think this will make it a fairer merit-earning game, to new comers > > getting helps from mentors and (graduation and/or high-level) reviews > > from members, watchers considering to help, mentors eager to help > > graduations, more focused members, ... > > > > > > > > Also re point 2 do you think we should drop that ASF members can > > automatically get IPMC membership and change it to requiring a vote by the > > IPMC? It’s has always seem odd to me that this is the case. We’ve recently > > voted more people in that we’ve had requests from ASF members. > > > > +1 to always be voting, whether they are ASF members or not, like other > > PMCs. > > > > > > > > Any other sugestions? > > > > > > Options 2 and 3 may cause some issues around mentors, but if they were > > not active then I guess it’s no big loss. > > > > My modified version includes all active people as mentors (committers) > > at least, so there's no loss as well. > > > > Regards, > > > > Woonsan > > > > > > > > And any suggestions on level of activity? Such as: > > > - Emailed the list in the last year. > > > - Reviewed at least one release in that time. > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.3.1 [RC1]
Hi all, carrying over my vote from the plc4x dev list. +1 Chris Am 08.03.19, 13:02 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" : Hello all, This is a call for vote to release Apache PLC4X (Incubating) version 0.3.1. The Apache PLC4X community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache PLC4X (Incubating) version 0.3.1. We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release. Apache PLC4X (incubating) is a set of libraries for communicating with industrial programmable logic controllers (PLCs) using a variety of protocols but with a shared API. PLC4X community vote and result thread: Result: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/44904efe6d2ded6442605e627d501dba097e79622308d91eb00799e7@%3Cdev.plc4x.apache.org%3E Vote: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7e9c475d07c0e12f813226aa123f54969ebb21a2277b32e9bd366d96@%3Cdev.plc4x.apache.org%3E The release candidates (RC1): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/plc4x/0.3.1-incubating/ Git tag for the release (RC1): https://github.com/apache/incubator-plc4x/releases/tag/release%2F0.3.1 Hash for the release tag: 7852b6d78a2b4c36ecf0f7c902816131e339adff Release Notes: https://github.com/apache/incubator-plc4x/blob/7852b6d78a2b4c36ecf0f7c902816131e339adff/RELEASE_NOTES The artifacts have been signed with Key : C336E0143A553B89, which can be found in the keys file: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/plc4x/KEYS Look at here for how to verify this release candidate: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PLC4X/Validating+a+staged+Release The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until necessary number of votes are reached. Please vote accordingly: [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason Julian Apache PLC4X - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.3.1 [RC1]
Hello all, This is a call for vote to release Apache PLC4X (Incubating) version 0.3.1. The Apache PLC4X community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache PLC4X (Incubating) version 0.3.1. We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release. Apache PLC4X (incubating) is a set of libraries for communicating with industrial programmable logic controllers (PLCs) using a variety of protocols but with a shared API. PLC4X community vote and result thread: Result: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/44904efe6d2ded6442605e627d501dba097e79622308d91eb00799e7@%3Cdev.plc4x.apache.org%3E Vote: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7e9c475d07c0e12f813226aa123f54969ebb21a2277b32e9bd366d96@%3Cdev.plc4x.apache.org%3E The release candidates (RC1): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/plc4x/0.3.1-incubating/ Git tag for the release (RC1): https://github.com/apache/incubator-plc4x/releases/tag/release%2F0.3.1 Hash for the release tag: 7852b6d78a2b4c36ecf0f7c902816131e339adff Release Notes: https://github.com/apache/incubator-plc4x/blob/7852b6d78a2b4c36ecf0f7c902816131e339adff/RELEASE_NOTES The artifacts have been signed with Key : C336E0143A553B89, which can be found in the keys file: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/plc4x/KEYS Look at here for how to verify this release candidate: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PLC4X/Validating+a+staged+Release The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until necessary number of votes are reached. Please vote accordingly: [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason Julian Apache PLC4X
[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-231) Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16787734#comment-16787734
]
Bertrand Delacretaz commented on INCUBATOR-231:
---
Could we include some form of automated tests for the Clutch output? Maybe run
another script after {{clutch.py}} that checks a few well-known values from
{{clutch.pkl}} which IIUC is what drives other tools.
> Cleanup Git-generated Incubator website
> ---
>
> Key: INCUBATOR-231
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-231
> Project: Incubator
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Bertrand Delacretaz
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: clutch2data.txt, gitbox.clutch.data.txt,
> gitbox.svn.diff.txt
>
>
> [http://incubator.apache.org/] is generated from
> [https://github.com/apache/incubator] but a few things (clutch, project
> pages) are still maintained under
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/]
> We should cleanup and unify for consistency, and there's a number of folders
> in svn that are not used anymore. Everything should move to Git to avoid
> confusion.
> Also, a lot of the projects information in the XML files found under
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/] is
> duplicated in other places, LDAP, podlings websites etc - it would be good to
> clean that up and simplify those pages to adapt to our current workflows,
> while preserving history where it makes sense.
> There are also YAML files with yet more duplicated information at
> [http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings/] ,
> not sure if that's used or useful.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: A smaller IPMC
+1 option #4. Based on Justin's fact-finding, these "extra" IPMC members are not the source of the IPMC's problem. Let's put the conversation about removing IPMC members to bed so that we can focus on more promising causes and cures. Best, Myrle On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:33 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > It’s been suggested that the IPMC is too large, what do other IPMC members > think might be a way to address this? > > Please discuss and indicate +1 what you would think would help, you can > vote for more than one. > > Some suggestions: > 1. Ask all inactive IPMC if they want to continue being on the IPMC and > see who steps down. Being inactive they are probably not following this > list so we need to identify and send each one email them personally. > 2. There were some questions around merit raised, remove all IPMC members > who were not on the initial proposal and who were voted in. Those left on > the IPMC vote back in those who are currently active. > 3. Get rid of all IPMC members, and vote (with ASF members vote being > binding - not sure how else it could be done?) currently active ones back > in. > 4. Do nothing as this is not actually a problem but instead address other > underlying issues. e.g. lack of mentor engagement. > > Also re point 2 do you think we should drop that ASF members can > automatically get IPMC membership and change it to requiring a vote by the > IPMC? It’s has always seem odd to me that this is the case. We’ve recently > voted more people in that we’ve had requests from ASF members. > > Any other sugestions? > > Options 2 and 3 may cause some issues around mentors, but if they were not > active then I guess it’s no big loss. > > And any suggestions on level of activity? Such as: > - Emailed the list in the last year. > - Reviewed at least one release in that time. > > It’s already been determined that some (about 15%) of the less than active > PMC members (out of the 100 odd that are not signed up to the IPMC private > list) do help out infrequently but that help is very useful. That may also > apply to other inactive IPMC members, so I would suggest the bar for what > consider active be kept low. > > Thanks, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: A smaller IPMC
I feel the real issue may be not the number of inactive IPMCs, but the number of active IPMCs. It might be helpful to make sure each project has enough active IPMCs. >From this point of view, the issue with many inactive IPMCs is that it seems like a project has enough IPMCs so there is no urgent to vote for more IPMC members, but in fact there are only few active IPMCs. On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 11:55 PM Furkan KAMACI wrote: > Hi All, > > +1 for #4 > > I think that we should focus on what is the underlying reason. I suggest > starting a new thread to point for such purpose. We need to address the > problem for both newcomers and long-standing members. For example, I > personally think that it is not fluid at some points how incubator works, > what is the general flow of a mentor's task, how to verify a release for a > newcomer. As another example, there are many people who know what is a > majority vote ( > https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval) but does > not know `which requires a majority vote and which lazy consensus ( > https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus) So, such > lack of knowledge may prevent people to engage with the community. > > We can start a poll about detecting underlying problems (both for getting > feedback and try to understand the knowledge level). Also, these may be > addressed via Apache Training (how to maintain an open source project - > Apache/non-Apache). > > However, since this is another topic, as I suggested we should talk about > it at another thread. > > Kind Regards, > Furkan KAMACI > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 9:27 AM Justin Mclean > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > I think this thread misses the point of the original observation. > > > > Several people has said the issue is that the IPMC is too big and you > > yourself said how IPMC members join was an issue. This email was trying > to > > address that. Your response means I guess that you changed your mind? > > > > > What I've seen is a suggestion that active IPMC members on general@ > > should be expected to be on the private list. > > > > At least one person said they should be removed. We’ve contacted them all > > one by one several months ago and asked them to sign up. This was > mentioned > > in an incubator board report. We also added more moderations to the > private > > list. A couple did sign up and a couple stood down form the IPMC, but the > > majority did nothing. Looking at them, most are totally inactive, the few > > who are slightly active occasionally do helpful things. I’m not sure we > can > > force them to sign up. (Although I did notice one did today.) Any > > suggestions? > > > > > Secondly, I think the framing of #4 (which I agree with in the context > > of this thread, given the above observation) incorrectly identifies the > > "real" problem. While inactive mentors a problem for individual podlings > I > > don't believe they are the cause of the inteference the IPMC can display > > when it comes to things like podling releases. > > > > Do you consider voting on releases by the IPMC to be interference? If > > mentors are not active how do podlings make releases if they cannot get 3 > > +1 mentor votes on their list? > > > > Thanks, > > Justin > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > >
