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...)

I think what most of us are trying to achieve is the ability for the code to remain in sync, while getting access to the Github features we so desperately need. This is obviously a difficult problem for everyone involved and I respect that. A healthy debate on this is the only way we are going

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

I see your concern, Chris. Yes, the community will continue to discuss. Hopefully others will join in with their views. From: Mattmann, Chris A (3980) Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:16 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...)

> 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...)

Hi Sebastien, [..] >> >> Hi Sebastien, >> >> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board. >> >> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the >> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that >> there were more than a few board members that

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...)

We have two other threads going on this. One is in the private@ mailing list, which we then moved into the dev@ list to get general community input on this. We are actively discussing the role the cloudstack org will play and nothing has been decided. My understanding is that we have no

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...)

> On Mar 17, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) > wrote: > > 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/cloudstack. Merges that

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 (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 (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...)

> On Mar 17, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote: > > Hi Sebastien, > > Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board. > > The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the > ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that >

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

OK, last comment for a bit, sorry for the top post, going to try and mix 2 replies in 1 email. To Sebastien: It’s more than just permissions - it’s where people *go to* and *believe* that the community making the code is at. In all of your statements, that community will be cloudstack/cloudstack

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

As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to help with developer workflow and CI. To my understanding, all code that goes in there will end up back in the canonical ASF CloudStack repo (and, as such, be mirrored to apache/cloudstack). This is simply a workaround to

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

Hi Will, Cloudstack is more than just the code and its mirroring. It’s the community and the ability for those to participate. The issues that occur at cloudstack/cloudstack will not be mirrored to the ASF; the convo won’t be mirrored, and least of all the people and their belief in the branding

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...)

+1 Sounds like a plan. Paul Angus VP Technology , ShapeBlue t: @cloudyangus e: paul.an...@shapeblue.com| w: www.shapeblue.com From: John Burwell

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...)

Chris, I don't see how cloudstack/cloudstack can be a problem to the foudation except for the PMC as they will be left with managing keeping it in sync. I also don't see how a fork can be against apache policy as anyone is allowed to fork the software at any time. We as PMC are no exception

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/cloudstack. Merges that happen there, conversation that happens there on PRs and issues, labels, etc., will be captured there and likely at

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...)

Hi Sebastien, Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board. The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned at the prospect of Apache

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

Agreed Mike, there may be confusion generated by the concurrent MCC fork by SBP but that is not related to the Apache CloudStack developer workflow improvements being discussed. On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote: > As far as I understand,

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...)

I'm not sure what you think is "really going on." > On Mar 18, 2016, at 1:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going > on. > >> On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Tutkowski, Mike >> wrote: >> >> As

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

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

I am not sure I understand how people wanting to participate with Apache Cloudstack would ever be at a disadvantage, it would still all be the same code base. The changes in cloudstack/cloudstack would get pushed to the ASF repo and would then get mirrored to the apache/cloudstack repo, so they

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

If this gives us the github permissions we need, then we need to work with them to figure out the details... *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Jim

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...)

That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going on. > On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Tutkowski, Mike > wrote: > > As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to help > with developer workflow and CI. > > To my understanding,