Re: Your vote is casting Was: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
On 23 July 2012 05:50, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: Jukka, thanks for explaining. Ross, Andrus, would you please consider voting for the Openmeetings release? We are stuck with insufficient number of votes. Thanks! Apologies - I've been on the road for nearly three weeks. I'm back now but dealing with backlog. I expect to get to this by the end of the week if it is still needed at that point. Ross Incubator folks, Don't allow another little cute kitten and fluffy puppy die by missing Apache Openmeetings (Incubating) release: http://demo.openmeetings.de/openmeetings/ http://demo.dataved.ru/openmeetings/ You are mostly welcome to support our release here http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - 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: Your vote is casting Was: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi Ross, we will be happy to get your feedback on the release, but there is no need to rush, we got enough IPMC votes now to proceed Sebastian 2012/7/25 Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org: On 23 July 2012 05:50, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: Jukka, thanks for explaining. Ross, Andrus, would you please consider voting for the Openmeetings release? We are stuck with insufficient number of votes. Thanks! Apologies - I've been on the road for nearly three weeks. I'm back now but dealing with backlog. I expect to get to this by the end of the week if it is still needed at that point. Ross Incubator folks, Don't allow another little cute kitten and fluffy puppy die by missing Apache Openmeetings (Incubating) release: http://demo.openmeetings.de/openmeetings/ http://demo.dataved.ru/openmeetings/ You are mostly welcome to support our release here http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - 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 -- Sebastian Wagner https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock http://www.openmeetings.de http://www.webbase-design.de http://www.wagner-sebastian.com seba.wag...@gmail.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Your vote is casting Was: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Andrus, thanks! We also have a shepherd. Matt, aren't you, by chance, IPMC? -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote: Hi Alexei, I am listed as a mentor in error at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openmeetings.html . I was the champion on the proposal. But even though I like the project, I knew I wouldn't be able to lead you through incubator and give all needed attention due to other commitments. So I indicated back then that I am stepping down after incubator entry. So I guess we should take my name from the mentor list. Having said that, I'll be happy to lend a hand on this occasion and I am still an IPMC member. Just give me some time to evaluate the release. One more note - you actually need 2 more votes. Only Egor's (yegor) vote is binding. You are listed as a mentor, but you don't appear to be an IPMC member. This means we'll need help from Ross and/or Jim. And maybe we can enroll new mentors. Anyone? Andrus On Jul 23, 2012, at 7:50 AM, Alexei Fedotov wrote: Jukka, thanks for explaining. Ross, Andrus, would you please consider voting for the Openmeetings release? We are stuck with insufficient number of votes. Thanks! Incubator folks, Don't allow another little cute kitten and fluffy puppy die by missing Apache Openmeetings (Incubating) release: http://demo.openmeetings.de/openmeetings/ http://demo.dataved.ru/openmeetings/ You are mostly welcome to support our release here http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - 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: Your vote is casting Was: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
BTW, most current people's memberships across apache cane be checked here: http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html On Jul 24, 2012, at 2:12 PM, Alexei Fedotov wrote: Andrus, thanks! We also have a shepherd. Matt, aren't you, by chance, IPMC? -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote: Hi Alexei, I am listed as a mentor in error at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openmeetings.html . I was the champion on the proposal. But even though I like the project, I knew I wouldn't be able to lead you through incubator and give all needed attention due to other commitments. So I indicated back then that I am stepping down after incubator entry. So I guess we should take my name from the mentor list. Having said that, I'll be happy to lend a hand on this occasion and I am still an IPMC member. Just give me some time to evaluate the release. One more note - you actually need 2 more votes. Only Egor's (yegor) vote is binding. You are listed as a mentor, but you don't appear to be an IPMC member. This means we'll need help from Ross and/or Jim. And maybe we can enroll new mentors. Anyone? Andrus On Jul 23, 2012, at 7:50 AM, Alexei Fedotov wrote: Jukka, thanks for explaining. Ross, Andrus, would you please consider voting for the Openmeetings release? We are stuck with insufficient number of votes. Thanks! Incubator folks, Don't allow another little cute kitten and fluffy puppy die by missing Apache Openmeetings (Incubating) release: http://demo.openmeetings.de/openmeetings/ http://demo.dataved.ru/openmeetings/ You are mostly welcome to support our release here http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Your vote is casting Was: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi Alexei, I am listed as a mentor in error at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openmeetings.html . I was the champion on the proposal. But even though I like the project, I knew I wouldn't be able to lead you through incubator and give all needed attention due to other commitments. So I indicated back then that I am stepping down after incubator entry. So I guess we should take my name from the mentor list. Having said that, I'll be happy to lend a hand on this occasion and I am still an IPMC member. Just give me some time to evaluate the release. One more note - you actually need 2 more votes. Only Egor's (yegor) vote is binding. You are listed as a mentor, but you don't appear to be an IPMC member. This means we'll need help from Ross and/or Jim. And maybe we can enroll new mentors. Anyone? Andrus On Jul 23, 2012, at 7:50 AM, Alexei Fedotov wrote: Jukka, thanks for explaining. Ross, Andrus, would you please consider voting for the Openmeetings release? We are stuck with insufficient number of votes. Thanks! Incubator folks, Don't allow another little cute kitten and fluffy puppy die by missing Apache Openmeetings (Incubating) release: http://demo.openmeetings.de/openmeetings/ http://demo.dataved.ru/openmeetings/ You are mostly welcome to support our release here http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Your vote is casting Was: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Jukka, thanks for explaining. Ross, Andrus, would you please consider voting for the Openmeetings release? We are stuck with insufficient number of votes. Thanks! Incubator folks, Don't allow another little cute kitten and fluffy puppy die by missing Apache Openmeetings (Incubating) release: http://demo.openmeetings.de/openmeetings/ http://demo.dataved.ru/openmeetings/ You are mostly welcome to support our release here http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf -- With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ +7 916 562 8095 On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote: The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@ list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution? See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases for the Incubator policy on releases. You're almost done, just an extra approval vote on general@ is still needed (and since you already have two mentor +1s, you only need one more IPMC member to vote for the release). BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hello Jukka,
You wrote:
IP clearance - No release:Openmeetings
The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@
list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC
approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution?
[1] http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf
--
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://dataved.ru/
+7 916 562 8095
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
My suggestion is to ask the podlings now in category 2 to report again
in May on their progress on the identified blockers. If there's been
no measurable progress by then, we'll dig deeper to see what we can
do. Podlings reporting in other months can be picked up for a similar
oversight cycle over the coming months. By July we should then have a
pretty accurate record of progress throughout the entire Incubator,
including a clear list of podlings that are stuck and need help.
Following up on this, here's a quick graph I put together when
preparing for this month's board report: http://twitpic.com/a7o368
The graph shows how podlings have moved from one (subjective)
categorization to another (or to graduation/retirement) between their
two scheduled reports in the February-July time frame (I'm only
counting projects that were already past their first three months at
the Incubator). The edge width is proportional to the number of
podlings that made that particular state change. The Graphviz source
of the graph is included at the end of this message.
The overall picture looks pretty good. We have strong movement towards
graduation, and so far no regressions from the ready to graduate
state back to low activity or diversity.
Here's the list of projects that stayed at the same category from one
report to the next:
IP clearance: Amber
No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty, Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
The IP clearance issue in Amber seems to be finally resolved ( LEGAL-134).
The release issues are being resolved, as Any23 has just passed a
release vote and I've seen good progress towards an Apache release in
both Cordova and JSPWiki. I don't know the release status in
Bloodhound.
The low activity projects remain a problem though there are a few
projects who've managed to escape that trap. For the rest we need to
find solutions. Kato was already retired, and AWF and Kitty getting
there. EasyAnt might go the subproject route, and PhotArk has been
showing increased activity lately. I don't know what's going on in
Ambari or Nuvem.
The low diversity state is a bit vague catchall category for
projects that don't yet feel ready to graduate. I'm not too concerned
if some projects take a bit longer there as long as they don't regress
to low activity. Once a project has hit the low diversity category,
chances are quite high that it'll end up graduating.
The podlings that were ready to graduate for more than three months
are a bit mixed story. Flume already graduated and Lucene.NET is just
about to, but NPanday looks to be in trouble as activity there seems
to have plummeted since May for some reason.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
/*
IP clearance - IP clearance: Amber
IP clearance - No release:Openmeetings
No release- No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
No release- Low diversity: Mesos
No release- Ready to graduate: Clerezza, DirectMemory,
OpenOffice, Stanbol
Low activity - Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty,
Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low activity - Retire:Kalumet, Zeta Components
Low activity - No release:Celix, VXQuery
Low activity - Low diversity: SIS
Low activity - Ready to graduate: Wink
Low diversity - Low activity: Droids, ODF Toolkit
Low diversity - Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Low diversity - No release:S4, Wave
Low diversity - Ready to graduate: Etch, HCatalog, Isis, Kafka,
Oozie, VCL, Wookie
Low diversity - Graduate: Hama, MRUnit
Ready to graduate - Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
Ready to graduate - Graduate: Accumulo, Jena, ManifoldCF,
OpenNLP, RAT, Rave, Sqoop
*/
digraph Incubator {
/* { rank = same; IP clearance; no release; low activity; low
diversity } */
{ rank = same; graduated; retired }
IP clearance - IP clearance [penwidth=1];
IP clearance - no release [penwidth=1];
no release - no release [penwidth=4];
no release - low diversity [penwidth=1];
no release - ready to graduate [penwidth=4];
low activity - low
Openmeetings release approval by Incubator PMC Was: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
[cc-ed to dev@ and changed the subject]
Hello Jukka,
You wrote:
IP clearance - No release:Openmeetings
The release vote have successfully passed and forwarded to general@
list [1]. What should be our next step? Have we got Incubator PMC
approval? Can we proceed with wider distribution?
[1] http://markmail.org/message/azenwwlcfhnxmysf
--
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://dataved.ru/
+7 916 562 8095
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
My suggestion is to ask the podlings now in category 2 to report again
in May on their progress on the identified blockers. If there's been
no measurable progress by then, we'll dig deeper to see what we can
do. Podlings reporting in other months can be picked up for a similar
oversight cycle over the coming months. By July we should then have a
pretty accurate record of progress throughout the entire Incubator,
including a clear list of podlings that are stuck and need help.
Following up on this, here's a quick graph I put together when
preparing for this month's board report: http://twitpic.com/a7o368
The graph shows how podlings have moved from one (subjective)
categorization to another (or to graduation/retirement) between their
two scheduled reports in the February-July time frame (I'm only
counting projects that were already past their first three months at
the Incubator). The edge width is proportional to the number of
podlings that made that particular state change. The Graphviz source
of the graph is included at the end of this message.
The overall picture looks pretty good. We have strong movement towards
graduation, and so far no regressions from the ready to graduate
state back to low activity or diversity.
Here's the list of projects that stayed at the same category from one
report to the next:
IP clearance: Amber
No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty, Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
The IP clearance issue in Amber seems to be finally resolved ( LEGAL-134).
The release issues are being resolved, as Any23 has just passed a
release vote and I've seen good progress towards an Apache release in
both Cordova and JSPWiki. I don't know the release status in
Bloodhound.
The low activity projects remain a problem though there are a few
projects who've managed to escape that trap. For the rest we need to
find solutions. Kato was already retired, and AWF and Kitty getting
there. EasyAnt might go the subproject route, and PhotArk has been
showing increased activity lately. I don't know what's going on in
Ambari or Nuvem.
The low diversity state is a bit vague catchall category for
projects that don't yet feel ready to graduate. I'm not too concerned
if some projects take a bit longer there as long as they don't regress
to low activity. Once a project has hit the low diversity category,
chances are quite high that it'll end up graduating.
The podlings that were ready to graduate for more than three months
are a bit mixed story. Flume already graduated and Lucene.NET is just
about to, but NPanday looks to be in trouble as activity there seems
to have plummeted since May for some reason.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
/*
IP clearance - IP clearance: Amber
IP clearance - No release:Openmeetings
No release- No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
No release- Low diversity: Mesos
No release- Ready to graduate: Clerezza, DirectMemory,
OpenOffice, Stanbol
Low activity - Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty,
Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low activity - Retire:Kalumet, Zeta Components
Low activity - No release:Celix, VXQuery
Low activity - Low diversity: SIS
Low activity - Ready to graduate: Wink
Low diversity - Low activity: Droids, ODF Toolkit
Low diversity - Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Low diversity - No release:S4, Wave
Low diversity - Ready to graduate: Etch, HCatalog, Isis, Kafka,
Oozie, VCL, Wookie
Low diversity - Graduate: Hama, MRUnit
Ready to graduate - Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
Ready to graduate - Graduate: Accumulo, Jena, ManifoldCF,
OpenNLP, RAT, Rave, Sqoop
*/
digraph Incubator {
/* { rank = same; IP clearance; no release; low activity; low
diversity } */
{ rank = same; graduated; retired }
IP clearance - IP clearance [penwidth=1];
IP clearance - no release [penwidth=1];
no release - no release [penwidth=4];
no release - low diversity [penwidth=1];
no release - ready to
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Here are some thoughts about this based on my particular experiences. So I won't preface each particular observation with 'In my experience.' There is a narrative around the Foundation about 'Diversity'. The narrative goes like this: once upon a time, one (or more) projects were predominantly staffed by volunteers supported by a single employer. The story goes on to describe two bad outcomes that resulted from this. In the first bad outcome, the employer's priorities changed, all the volunteers wandered away, and the project withered. In the second bad outcome, the volunteers with one employer exerted undue influence over the technical direction of the project, freezing out other contributors. I've not seen the first problem with my own eyes, but I may have seen, and swept up after, the remains of it. (Sort of like observing the nebula after the supernova has exploded.) I've seen some conflicts about the second. Not, however, in podlings, rather but in projects of long-standing. In the incubator, the stated requirement of Diversity is intended to avoid graduating projects with these problems baked in. However, before a project can even get to the doorstep of an actual diversity problem in the sense described, it has to get over another hurdle. It has to be large enough. If a podling has three people in it, the problem is not 'the same employer pays all of them to contribute' -- it is 'there are only three people'! Here, then, is the big 'community development' challenge. A small group of people with a good idea (and perhaps) some code shows up, collects mentors, and sets up shop. They learn the ropes, write more code, make releases. They make some sort of web site. And they wait, metaphorically, for the phone to ring. There are, I assert, two possible explanations for this situation. One is that, sadly, no one cares at all. No one uses the code, and so of course no one shows up to contribute. The second possibility is that there are users, but those users are not motivated to contribute. Maybe the thing works so well that no one has an itch to scratch. Maybe the users all work for organizations that don't, culturally, see the value of contributions open source. It would probably be good to try to understand which state any given small podling is in when trying to help them. Either way, this a marketing problem. The skills that write killer code don't make killer web sites, let alone exercise other marketing channels, let alone come up with ways of approaching large organizations to suggest that they might want to encourage their people to become contributors. Some podlings have very compelling technologies, and succeed without these skills. Some podlings have companies sponsoring their contributors who also put marketing money and talent to work. We're happy with this so long as they play nicely with trademarks. Some podlings, however, don't have either of these advantages, and need help. How can we help them? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
http://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2012/07/do-you-want-to-become-maven-committer.html is an example that comdev might want to propagate? On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: Here are some thoughts about this based on my particular experiences. So I won't preface each particular observation with 'In my experience.' There is a narrative around the Foundation about 'Diversity'. The narrative goes like this: once upon a time, one (or more) projects were predominantly staffed by volunteers supported by a single employer. The story goes on to describe two bad outcomes that resulted from this. In the first bad outcome, the employer's priorities changed, all the volunteers wandered away, and the project withered. In the second bad outcome, the volunteers with one employer exerted undue influence over the technical direction of the project, freezing out other contributors. I've not seen the first problem with my own eyes, but I may have seen, and swept up after, the remains of it. (Sort of like observing the nebula after the supernova has exploded.) I've seen some conflicts about the second. Not, however, in podlings, rather but in projects of long-standing. In the incubator, the stated requirement of Diversity is intended to avoid graduating projects with these problems baked in. However, before a project can even get to the doorstep of an actual diversity problem in the sense described, it has to get over another hurdle. It has to be large enough. If a podling has three people in it, the problem is not 'the same employer pays all of them to contribute' -- it is 'there are only three people'! Here, then, is the big 'community development' challenge. A small group of people with a good idea (and perhaps) some code shows up, collects mentors, and sets up shop. They learn the ropes, write more code, make releases. They make some sort of web site. And they wait, metaphorically, for the phone to ring. There are, I assert, two possible explanations for this situation. One is that, sadly, no one cares at all. No one uses the code, and so of course no one shows up to contribute. The second possibility is that there are users, but those users are not motivated to contribute. Maybe the thing works so well that no one has an itch to scratch. Maybe the users all work for organizations that don't, culturally, see the value of contributions open source. It would probably be good to try to understand which state any given small podling is in when trying to help them. Either way, this a marketing problem. The skills that write killer code don't make killer web sites, let alone exercise other marketing channels, let alone come up with ways of approaching large organizations to suggest that they might want to encourage their people to become contributors. Some podlings have very compelling technologies, and succeed without these skills. Some podlings have companies sponsoring their contributors who also put marketing money and talent to work. We're happy with this so long as they play nicely with trademarks. Some podlings, however, don't have either of these advantages, and need help. How can we help them? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
On 17 July 2012 11:44, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: http://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2012/07/do-you-want-to-become-maven-committer.html is an example that comdev might want to propagate? I think this is a really interesting experiment and look forward to seeing the outcomes. In many ways it simply formalises what a healthy community should be doing anyway. It might be that making this explicit in the way Maven is seeking will be beneficial. Yesterday, here at OSCON, I participated in an Outercurve Foundation session looking at this problem within their own projects. This included representatives from a wide range of open source projects and foundations. There were some interesting ideas. One, in particular, caught my eye - Ubuntu have a gamified the developer engagement process with a project called Ubuntu Accomplishments. Personally I'm conflicted by this. I don't think I like the idea of trophies as this brings competition into the community. However, the process of creating the trophies led the Ubuntu team to create task oriented documentation which looked pretty useful. In addition, their automated code for detecting and awarding accomplishments could be used to trigger a human response rather than a machine awarded trophy. For example, clearly indicating that a bug report is the contributors first bug report could prompt a quick personal email of the form thanks for taking the time... our project thrives because of people like you... we'll review soon... if you want to follow up please mail dev@ Thoughts? Ross On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: Here are some thoughts about this based on my particular experiences. So I won't preface each particular observation with 'In my experience.' There is a narrative around the Foundation about 'Diversity'. The narrative goes like this: once upon a time, one (or more) projects were predominantly staffed by volunteers supported by a single employer. The story goes on to describe two bad outcomes that resulted from this. In the first bad outcome, the employer's priorities changed, all the volunteers wandered away, and the project withered. In the second bad outcome, the volunteers with one employer exerted undue influence over the technical direction of the project, freezing out other contributors. I've not seen the first problem with my own eyes, but I may have seen, and swept up after, the remains of it. (Sort of like observing the nebula after the supernova has exploded.) I've seen some conflicts about the second. Not, however, in podlings, rather but in projects of long-standing. In the incubator, the stated requirement of Diversity is intended to avoid graduating projects with these problems baked in. However, before a project can even get to the doorstep of an actual diversity problem in the sense described, it has to get over another hurdle. It has to be large enough. If a podling has three people in it, the problem is not 'the same employer pays all of them to contribute' -- it is 'there are only three people'! Here, then, is the big 'community development' challenge. A small group of people with a good idea (and perhaps) some code shows up, collects mentors, and sets up shop. They learn the ropes, write more code, make releases. They make some sort of web site. And they wait, metaphorically, for the phone to ring. There are, I assert, two possible explanations for this situation. One is that, sadly, no one cares at all. No one uses the code, and so of course no one shows up to contribute. The second possibility is that there are users, but those users are not motivated to contribute. Maybe the thing works so well that no one has an itch to scratch. Maybe the users all work for organizations that don't, culturally, see the value of contributions open source. It would probably be good to try to understand which state any given small podling is in when trying to help them. Either way, this a marketing problem. The skills that write killer code don't make killer web sites, let alone exercise other marketing channels, let alone come up with ways of approaching large organizations to suggest that they might want to encourage their people to become contributors. Some podlings have very compelling technologies, and succeed without these skills. Some podlings have companies sponsoring their contributors who also put marketing money and talent to work. We're happy with this so long as they play nicely with trademarks. Some podlings, however, don't have either of these advantages, and need help. How can we help them? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi, On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: This is great stuff. It implies the ComDev PPMC ought to focus on the low diversity trap while Incubator focuses on more process driven IP, release, graduation. Sounds good. Of course this means we should figure our exactly what low diversity is. As discussed recently low diversity is not a problem if the project can demonstrate it is open to newcomers. Right. I'm even thinking that we should drop the low diversity label and simply replace it with a more generic not yet ready to graduate one until we have a better shared understanding of the things podlings falling into that category still need to do. Given I committed to find a way for ComDev to support the Incubation process do you think this is a starting point? Yes. Going through all the podlings in that category and trying to spot common patterns and areas of potential trouble or improvement would be my first step here. BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi Sent from my Samdung Galaxy S3 Apologies for any typos On Jul 16, 2012 1:41 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: This is great stuff. It implies the ComDev PPMC ought to focus on the low diversity trap while Incubator focuses on more process driven IP, release, graduation. Sounds good. Of course this means we should figure our exactly what low diversity is. As discussed recently low diversity is not a problem if the project can demonstrate it is open to newcomers. Right. I'm even thinking that we should drop the low diversity label and simply replace it with a more generic not yet ready to graduate one until we have a better shared understanding of the things podlings falling into that category still need to do. Not ready for graduation is also too generic, for thw low diversity case we can have of lacking to attract new committers , in that case maybe the podling community can explain why to the IPMC also /w the help of Mentors and hence we are able to evaluate whether the reasons are really valid not to graduate or not For examle Isis is a very active and healthy community but it took a while till new blood comes into the community, which is changing recently but I believe it happens to other podlings as well But in general as u mentioned more investigations about categories of such cases is idd required Given I committed to find a way for ComDev to support the Incubation process do you think this is a starting point? Yes. Going through all the podlings in that category and trying to spot common patterns and areas of potential trouble or improvement would be my first step here. BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi Jukka, great stuff!
Regarding Isis: there are 2 new contributors now, we will try to make them
ready for committership!
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 2:15 AM
Subject: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February
report review)
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
My suggestion is to ask the podlings now in category 2 to report again
in May on their progress on the identified blockers. If there's been
no measurable progress by then, we'll dig deeper to see what we can
do. Podlings reporting in other months can be picked up for a similar
oversight cycle over the coming months. By July we should then have a
pretty accurate record of progress throughout the entire Incubator,
including a clear list of podlings that are stuck and need help.
Following up on this, here's a quick graph I put together when
preparing for this month's board report: http://twitpic.com/a7o368
The graph shows how podlings have moved from one (subjective)
categorization to another (or to graduation/retirement) between their
two scheduled reports in the February-July time frame (I'm only
counting projects that were already past their first three months at
the Incubator). The edge width is proportional to the number of
podlings that made that particular state change. The Graphviz source
of the graph is included at the end of this message.
The overall picture looks pretty good. We have strong movement towards
graduation, and so far no regressions from the ready to graduate
state back to low activity or diversity.
Here's the list of projects that stayed at the same category from one
report to the next:
IP clearance: Amber
No release: Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty, Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
The IP clearance issue in Amber seems to be finally resolved ( LEGAL-134).
The release issues are being resolved, as Any23 has just passed a
release vote and I've seen good progress towards an Apache release in
both Cordova and JSPWiki. I don't know the release status in
Bloodhound.
The low activity projects remain a problem though there are a few
projects who've managed to escape that trap. For the rest we need to
find solutions. Kato was already retired, and AWF and Kitty getting
there. EasyAnt might go the subproject route, and PhotArk has been
showing increased activity lately. I don't know what's going on in
Ambari or Nuvem.
The low diversity state is a bit vague catchall category for
projects that don't yet feel ready to graduate. I'm not too concerned
if some projects take a bit longer there as long as they don't regress
to low activity. Once a project has hit the low diversity category,
chances are quite high that it'll end up graduating.
The podlings that were ready to graduate for more than three months
are a bit mixed story. Flume already graduated and Lucene.NET is just
about to, but NPanday looks to be in trouble as activity there seems
to have plummeted since May for some reason.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
/*
IP clearance - IP clearance: Amber
IP clearance - No release: Openmeetings
No release - No release: Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
No release - Low diversity: Mesos
No release - Ready to graduate: Clerezza, DirectMemory,
OpenOffice, Stanbol
Low activity - Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty,
Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low activity - Retire: Kalumet, Zeta Components
Low activity - No release: Celix, VXQuery
Low activity - Low diversity: SIS
Low activity - Ready to graduate: Wink
Low diversity - Low activity: Droids, ODF Toolkit
Low diversity - Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Low diversity - No release: S4, Wave
Low diversity - Ready to graduate: Etch, HCatalog, Isis, Kafka,
Oozie, VCL, Wookie
Low diversity - Graduate: Hama, MRUnit
Ready to graduate - Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
Ready to graduate - Graduate: Accumulo, Jena, ManifoldCF,
OpenNLP, RAT, Rave, Sqoop
*/
digraph Incubator {
/* { rank = same; IP clearance; no release; low
activity; low
diversity } */
{ rank = same; graduated; retired }
IP clearance - IP clearance [penwidth=1];
IP clearance - no release [penwidth=1];
no release - no release [penwidth=4];
no release - low diversity [penwidth=1];
no release - ready to graduate [penwidth=4];
low activity - low activity [penwidth=7];
low activity - retired [penwidth=3];
low activity - no release
Re: Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
This is great stuff. It implies the ComDev PPMC ought to focus on the low
diversity trap while Incubator focuses on more process driven IP, release,
graduation.
Of course this means we should figure our exactly what low diversity is.
As discussed recently low diversity is not a problem if the project can
demonstrate it is open to newcomers.
Given I committed to find a way for ComDev to support the Incubation
process do you think this is a starting point?
Perhaps those of us at OSCON can meet up during the Apache Barcamp time to
explore options. I'm around on Tuesday and possibly some of Monday. Also
around during the week.
Ross
From a mobile device - forgive errors and terseness
On Jul 15, 2012 1:16 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
My suggestion is to ask the podlings now in category 2 to report again
in May on their progress on the identified blockers. If there's been
no measurable progress by then, we'll dig deeper to see what we can
do. Podlings reporting in other months can be picked up for a similar
oversight cycle over the coming months. By July we should then have a
pretty accurate record of progress throughout the entire Incubator,
including a clear list of podlings that are stuck and need help.
Following up on this, here's a quick graph I put together when
preparing for this month's board report: http://twitpic.com/a7o368
The graph shows how podlings have moved from one (subjective)
categorization to another (or to graduation/retirement) between their
two scheduled reports in the February-July time frame (I'm only
counting projects that were already past their first three months at
the Incubator). The edge width is proportional to the number of
podlings that made that particular state change. The Graphviz source
of the graph is included at the end of this message.
The overall picture looks pretty good. We have strong movement towards
graduation, and so far no regressions from the ready to graduate
state back to low activity or diversity.
Here's the list of projects that stayed at the same category from one
report to the next:
IP clearance: Amber
No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty, Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
The IP clearance issue in Amber seems to be finally resolved ( LEGAL-134).
The release issues are being resolved, as Any23 has just passed a
release vote and I've seen good progress towards an Apache release in
both Cordova and JSPWiki. I don't know the release status in
Bloodhound.
The low activity projects remain a problem though there are a few
projects who've managed to escape that trap. For the rest we need to
find solutions. Kato was already retired, and AWF and Kitty getting
there. EasyAnt might go the subproject route, and PhotArk has been
showing increased activity lately. I don't know what's going on in
Ambari or Nuvem.
The low diversity state is a bit vague catchall category for
projects that don't yet feel ready to graduate. I'm not too concerned
if some projects take a bit longer there as long as they don't regress
to low activity. Once a project has hit the low diversity category,
chances are quite high that it'll end up graduating.
The podlings that were ready to graduate for more than three months
are a bit mixed story. Flume already graduated and Lucene.NET is just
about to, but NPanday looks to be in trouble as activity there seems
to have plummeted since May for some reason.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
/*
IP clearance - IP clearance: Amber
IP clearance - No release:Openmeetings
No release- No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova,
JSPWiki
No release- Low diversity: Mesos
No release- Ready to graduate: Clerezza, DirectMemory,
OpenOffice, Stanbol
Low activity - Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty,
Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low activity - Retire:Kalumet, Zeta Components
Low activity - No release:Celix, VXQuery
Low activity - Low diversity: SIS
Low activity - Ready to graduate: Wink
Low diversity - Low activity: Droids, ODF Toolkit
Low diversity - Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Low diversity - No release:S4, Wave
Low diversity - Ready to graduate: Etch, HCatalog, Isis, Kafka,
Oozie, VCL, Wookie
Low diversity - Graduate: Hama, MRUnit
Ready to graduate - Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
Ready to graduate - Graduate: Accumulo, Jena, ManifoldCF,
OpenNLP, RAT, Rave, Sqoop
*/
digraph Incubator {
/* { rank = same; IP clearance; no release; low activity; low
diversity } */
{ rank = same;
Incubation state transitions and stuck projects (Was: February report review)
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
My suggestion is to ask the podlings now in category 2 to report again
in May on their progress on the identified blockers. If there's been
no measurable progress by then, we'll dig deeper to see what we can
do. Podlings reporting in other months can be picked up for a similar
oversight cycle over the coming months. By July we should then have a
pretty accurate record of progress throughout the entire Incubator,
including a clear list of podlings that are stuck and need help.
Following up on this, here's a quick graph I put together when
preparing for this month's board report: http://twitpic.com/a7o368
The graph shows how podlings have moved from one (subjective)
categorization to another (or to graduation/retirement) between their
two scheduled reports in the February-July time frame (I'm only
counting projects that were already past their first three months at
the Incubator). The edge width is proportional to the number of
podlings that made that particular state change. The Graphviz source
of the graph is included at the end of this message.
The overall picture looks pretty good. We have strong movement towards
graduation, and so far no regressions from the ready to graduate
state back to low activity or diversity.
Here's the list of projects that stayed at the same category from one
report to the next:
IP clearance: Amber
No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty, Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
The IP clearance issue in Amber seems to be finally resolved ( LEGAL-134).
The release issues are being resolved, as Any23 has just passed a
release vote and I've seen good progress towards an Apache release in
both Cordova and JSPWiki. I don't know the release status in
Bloodhound.
The low activity projects remain a problem though there are a few
projects who've managed to escape that trap. For the rest we need to
find solutions. Kato was already retired, and AWF and Kitty getting
there. EasyAnt might go the subproject route, and PhotArk has been
showing increased activity lately. I don't know what's going on in
Ambari or Nuvem.
The low diversity state is a bit vague catchall category for
projects that don't yet feel ready to graduate. I'm not too concerned
if some projects take a bit longer there as long as they don't regress
to low activity. Once a project has hit the low diversity category,
chances are quite high that it'll end up graduating.
The podlings that were ready to graduate for more than three months
are a bit mixed story. Flume already graduated and Lucene.NET is just
about to, but NPanday looks to be in trouble as activity there seems
to have plummeted since May for some reason.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
/*
IP clearance - IP clearance: Amber
IP clearance - No release:Openmeetings
No release- No release:Any23, Bloodhound, Cordova, JSPWiki
No release- Low diversity: Mesos
No release- Ready to graduate: Clerezza, DirectMemory,
OpenOffice, Stanbol
Low activity - Low activity: Ambari, AWF, EasyAnt, Kitty,
Nuvem, PhotArk, Kato
Low activity - Retire:Kalumet, Zeta Components
Low activity - No release:Celix, VXQuery
Low activity - Low diversity: SIS
Low activity - Ready to graduate: Wink
Low diversity - Low activity: Droids, ODF Toolkit
Low diversity - Low diversity: Airavata, Bigtop, Chukwa, Tashi
Low diversity - No release:S4, Wave
Low diversity - Ready to graduate: Etch, HCatalog, Isis, Kafka,
Oozie, VCL, Wookie
Low diversity - Graduate: Hama, MRUnit
Ready to graduate - Ready to graduate: Flume, Lucene.NET, NPanday
Ready to graduate - Graduate: Accumulo, Jena, ManifoldCF,
OpenNLP, RAT, Rave, Sqoop
*/
digraph Incubator {
/* { rank = same; IP clearance; no release; low activity; low
diversity } */
{ rank = same; graduated; retired }
IP clearance - IP clearance [penwidth=1];
IP clearance - no release [penwidth=1];
no release - no release [penwidth=4];
no release - low diversity [penwidth=1];
no release - ready to graduate [penwidth=4];
low activity - low activity [penwidth=7];
low activity - retired [penwidth=3];
low activity - no release [penwidth=2];
low activity - low diversity [penwidth=1];
low activity - ready to graduate [penwidth=1];
low diversity - low diversity [penwidth=4];
low diversity - low activity [penwidth=2];
low diversity - no release [penwidth=2];
low diversity - ready to graduate [penwidth=7];
low diversity - graduated [penwidth=2];
ready to graduate - ready to graduate [penwidth=3];
ready to graduate - graduated [penwidth=7];
}
