Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Hi, Sorry to step in late on that thread. I have a question for Jim, David, Sam. As it seams, a lot of us in the "CloudStack community" would love to work with github features to speedup the project development cycle, The fact that some other ASF projects are interested too. Would it be

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

ot;dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:31 AM > To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull > request: Is the p

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

he.org Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) Hi Mike, Thank you. What you describe effectively below is going to implicitly switch the “canonical” repo in my opinion of the repository to cloudstack/clou

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

> > What would you be able to do if the git-dual experiment were expanded to > CloudStack that you couldn't do with the proposal above? I suggest that you > take full advantage of the fact that people are now listening. > Thanks for chiming in Sam, Could you give us a summary of the Whimsy

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

We can see if we can get the 'apache-cloudstack' org on github if that is preferred. No reason not to try... What is currently at 'cloudstack/cloudstack' is NOT what we are proposing going forward. This is currently an actual fork which was put in place simply for the purpose of testing. We

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:39 PM, sebgoa wrote: > >> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:30 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: >> >> I'm more concerned that the page is indistinguishable from a fork, and >> gives no indication of official status. That may be OK for a work in >>

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

> On Mar 17, 2016, at 6:15 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote: > >> As to forks being against Apache >> policy, forks are not, however forks that use the Apache e.g., >> namespace, that have the

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

me that there is something more than meets the eye here. Let’s keep discussing, hopefully with more participation from the community besides the two of us. Cheers, Chris > >> Thanks, >> Chris >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From:

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

- > From: <williamstev...@gmail.com> on behalf of Will Stevens > <wstev...@cloudops.com> > Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Date: Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:30 PM > To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.ap

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Ok Jim, it seems we are on one line here. Sorry to bother but I wanted to make sure. In my understanding the moving was only about the part already on github. I'll hold my peace for a while unless we are actually talking about the technical implementation of a convenient developer workflow again

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

All, +1 to Will’s proposal/approach. All we are really talking about is rehoming the apache/cloudstack repository mirror to cloudstack/cloudstack. The canonical repository would remain the official Apache git repository hosted on Apache owned hardware. Therefore, we would maintain our current

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

As Sam indicated, there was a lot of hush-and-rush about all this, with little communicated and much assumed. It appears that now things are more well known and the matters are being addressed. But for the record, yes, there was the impression and (mis)understanding that "moving" to GH was indeed

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 2016, at 2:12 PM, sebgoa wrote: > > > > > > Personally I have always thought that this is a very serious issue and > trend in open source projects and that ASF (and the board in

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

> On Mar 19, 2016, at 2:12 PM, sebgoa wrote: > > > Personally I have always thought that this is a very serious issue and trend > in open source projects and that ASF (and the board in particular) should try > to proactively address. What is the future of ASF in a GitHub

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

I'm away at the moment but I do believe that signed commits was acknowledged. board: r62882 - /foundation/board/github-discussion/explorations/signed-commits.txt Feel free to share anonimized content from that file. On Mar 19, 2016 2:12 PM, "sebgoa" wrote: > > > On Mar 19,

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

e Directors of the board and a > long-time > ASF’er, I’m here also as a concerned member since some actions that I have > seen > by Cloudstack related to this GitHub external organization imply to me > that there > is something more than meets the eye here. > > Let’s keep discussing,

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

I may be thinking too far outside the box, but hear me out as this is likely the best way to satisfy everyone's requirements. Recap: The community needs additional github permissions in order to integrate CI in order to maintain code quality. The ASF does not have enough granular control via

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

> On Mar 19, 2016, at 3:59 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > The initial action (creating the fork) was not clearly done by the PMC > as a whole, that is now being rectified by a retroactive vote being > taken. Even that I wouldn't suggest be done any differently: many > parts of

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote: > > >> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the > >> result of a subset of the PMC going off and doing this - > > > >I am not sure why you say subset. Let’s try to avoid polemics. > > I’m not

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Good to know that we have the right people talking with the right people. For the reasons I outlined, I'm confident we will sort this out because everyone's interests should be aligned on this and I'm sure ASF understands that in the age of infrastructure-as-code the ability to test myriad

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Top posting because keeping track is going to be hard. Remi and I have talked several times with David about GitHub access and so far the answer has been no. There are several issues in my understanding: - apache on github is one single org, so if you get some write permission in the org

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

k.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM > To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull > request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Ian Rae wrote: > Sam, > > Thanks for this context, I found it very helpful. We have an > interesting situation where no large companies are involved, and > really this is all about the needs of open source users. As you know > Apache CloudStack

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Thanks for the explanation Sam, I have to ask for your patience with me as > there is one remark in there that leaves me confused; Don't feel obligated > to answer in length but please confirm or negate my suspicion

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

+1 (maybe put/fork upr in there to prevent any cleaning from happening? ;) On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Yes exactly. I don't think we should delete the org, just the repo. I think > the usage of that org is out of scope for this conversation

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Please board and everybody at dev, Until the vote thread initiated by Will no action has been taken or sactioned by the PMC, only discussions were started. It has never been the intention of the PMC to move away from any repository but only to add a fork to facilitate work. The misunderstanding

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

Yes exactly. I don't think we should delete the org, just the repo. I think the usage of that org is out of scope for this conversation and will likely change based on this outcome. I think we should put that org on ice for the time being. On Mar 19, 2016 9:59 AM, "Daan Hoogland"

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Sam, Thanks for this context, I found it very helpful. We have an interesting situation where no large companies are involved, and really this is all about the needs of open source users. As you know Apache CloudStack is highly user driven, and is perhaps thankfully off the radar of the large

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Thanks for the explanation Sam, I have to ask for your patience with me as there is one remark in there that leaves me confused; Don't feel obligated to answer in length but please confirm or negate my suspicion On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: ​...​ >

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

gmail.com> > Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 3:15 AM > To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub]

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Message- From: sebgoa <run...@gmail.com> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:43 AM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (wa

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

ttm...@apache.org> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) Hi Sebastien, [..] >> >> Hi Sebastien, >> >> Thanks for you

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going >> on. > > Jim, I am not a native english speaker and this remark has no

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > I see you found the vote thread. Thanks for voting. :) > > For now I think it is best that we try to avoid using the cloudstack org > for anything in order to mitigate confusion and try to get everyone on the > same

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

gt; Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: <williamstev...@gmail.com> on behalf of Will Stevens > > > <wstev...@cloudops.com> > > > Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.ap

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going > on. > ​Jim, I am not a native english speaker and this remark has no meaning to me. It sounds somewhat hostile, can you explain what you mean? ​ --

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

t;wstev...@cloudops.com> > > Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > > Date: Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:30 PM > > To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: External fork of Cl

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

com> on behalf of Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:31 AM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudsta

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:30 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > > I'm more concerned that the page is indistinguishable from a fork, and > gives no indication of official status. That may be OK for a work in > progress, but isn't ideal as a final solution. I'll share that I've >

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

day, March 18, 2016 at 10:52 AM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack >On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> >wrote: >> >> I think we are on the same page.

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Hi Sam. Thank you very much for joining the conversation. We look forward > to working with you and appreciate your guidance on the matter. > > Just a quick note regarding my suggestion and the 'perception' concern

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > I may be thinking too far outside the box, but hear me out as this is > likely the best way to satisfy everyone's requirements. > > Recap: The community needs additional github permissions in order to > integrate CI in

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Hi Chris, We have never met but i recognize your name from members only ASF threads. For the benefit of others on this list it is useful to mention that you are a member of the ASF board. The PMC has filed its quarterly report for march, as well as an interim report about a month ago. The

RE: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

[mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com] Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 1:32 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) All, +1 to Will’s proposal/approach. All we are really talking about is re

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

Hi Sam. Thank you very much for joining the conversation. We look forward to working with you and appreciate your guidance on the matter. Just a quick note regarding my suggestion and the 'perception' concern you raised. I am actually proposing that we do an ownership transfer of the

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote: > As to forks being against Apache > policy, forks are not, however forks that use the Apache e.g., > namespace, that have the Apache logo, that use the Apache name for > the project *are* against Apache policy. If it’s

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

+BCC: David Nalley for possible guidance. Apache infra stated that 'The VP' dictated the policy to not allow 'repo:status' across the board for projects. Has anyone tried to engage the VP, in order to get them to have a closer look at this policy? It appears to be no way to exploit that function

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:16 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull > request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) > > Hi Mike, &g

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cl

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Will Stevens wrote: I may be thinking too far outside the box, but hear me out as this is likely the best way to satisfy everyone's requirements. Recap: The community needs additional github permissions in order to integrate CI in order

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:23 PM, sebgoa wrote: > “cloudstack” is a trademark of the ASF. ​ok, good. I thought is was refused on the grounds of being to generic a term.​ -- Daan

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

- From: Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 3:15 AM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (wa

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > > I think we are on the same page. I think we just need to start ironing out > the actual logistical and technical details for how to move forward. +1 - Sam Ruby

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

_ > From: Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull > request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) > > Hi Sebastien, >

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

> On Mar 18, 2016, at 8:01 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:23 PM, sebgoa wrote: > >> “cloudstack” is a trademark of the ASF. > > > ​ok, good. I thought is was refused on the grounds of being to generic a > term.​ > >

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

gt;> I do not believe anyone on the PMC is talking about forking CloudStack and >> going off in a different direction. >> >> From: Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> >> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Please be advised this conversation is continuing in a thread titled: Re: External fork of Cloudstack Mailing list link: http://markmail.org/message/53ct2mma4x4jm6s2?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Re:+External+fork+of+Cloudstack Please come join the conversation in that thread

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

ply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Date: Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:30 PM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack >Hey All, >I am going to try to keep moving this

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

rd to more discussion. > > Cheers, > Chris > > > -Original Message- > From: "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> > Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM > To: &q

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:36 AM, sebgoa wrote: > >> What would you be able to do if the git-dual experiment were expanded to >> CloudStack that you couldn't do with the proposal above? I suggest that you >> take full advantage of the fact that people are now listening. > >

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

t; > From: Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> > > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack > pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) > &

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

Hey All, I am going to try to keep moving this forward, and as such, I have created the 'apache-cloudstack' organization in github. I have invited everyone who is in the current 'cloudstack' organization as owners as well as Sam and Chris (also as owners). I think using this github org is

External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Hi, Sorry about my crude way of filing a PR for this, but I heard information about the Apache Cloudstack PMC actively discussing managing the project with GitHub as the primary source in a different organization than the github.com/apache/ org. Can someone clarify this for me? Clearly wearing

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

> the board based on our report (and annexed interim report). > > I am one of 9 Directors, but I believe if you’d like to test the waters > that > I have support of other board members in asking these questions based on > the > meetings yesterday. And as one of the Directors of the bo