+1
On 25/07/2013 11:16 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
So what's outlined in those paragraphs have counter examples at the ASF. I do
not believe it is a bad thing to have alternative distributions or forks, and
it doesn't matter where they are. What you are saying is that committers are
obliged to share all their work with other committers. Which is more coercion
than a matter of choice. For all work that happens within the bounds of the ASF
absolutely. Core changes should not be made projects without discussion. That's
a good rule and helps with stability. For work that happens outside the bounds
of the ASF an author is obliged to do nothing of the sort and the assert as
much is absurd quite honestly. What right does the ASF have over work that is
not done at Apache?
In fact there are people on the ASF Board who belong to companies that have
long standing forks and/or alternative distributions of ASF projects. Look at
Hadoop: there are two companies that have people on PMCs who maintain
alternative distributions with code that does not exist in standard
distributions. Both Cloudera and HortonWorks maintain versions of Hadoop that
are not compatible and/or have different code than the version from Apache.
There is selective patching and additions made to try and provide a better
distribution of Hadoop. I don't think this is a bad thing. This also happens
with Cassandra and the people who work at Datastax where an alternative
distribution is made. I don't know as much about what is in those distributions
insofar as code that doesn't exist in the standard Apache distribution. Again,
I don't think this is a bad thing. I'm sure they would all tell you that they
are trying to make a better version of said project, they work with customers,
work at a different pace and hope to integrate their work back in later if
possible.
If this is a sideways attempt to address what I'm doing in Tesla, which is what
it appears like to me, then just start a discussion on the dev list. Happy to
discuss it.
But if someone posits that all work related to an Apache project has to be done
at Apache, then I will say that is a ridiculous supposition and you can find
ten counter examples in ten minutes if you went looking.
On Jul 25, 2013, at 10:31 AM, Stephen Connolly
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thursday, 25 July 2013, Curtis Rueden wrote:
Hi Stephen and everyone,
I largely agree with Nigel, and would add that in general, bureaucratic
rules prohibiting various (often technically and/or socially sound) actions
such as forking are a great way to ensure that skilled people distance
themselves from the organization (i.e., quit the PMC, decline to join,
etc.). You will be left with only bureaucrats who can tolerate those
restrictions, and worse, create even more of them.
Of course, there should be good, publicly stated reasons for long-running
forks.
I will not speak for the author of the proposed revision, but my
understanding of the intent is that these forks should be hosted on ASF
hardware in public and as part of our community.
It's not about no forking, but allowing the committers to have an ongoing
view of things in the community.
Any committer is free to edit the wording if they want right now... The doc
is a work in progress proposal
Merging to mainline is ideal but not always practical in the real
world. Developers need the freedom to experiment, even (perhaps especially)
when in active community positions such as the PMC.
That said, it is certainly the responsibility of those on the PMC to act as
community leaders via best practices. But enforcing that in writing, at
least as the current proposal does, seems very counterproductive to me.
Regards,
Curtis
On Jul 25, 2013 8:59 AM, "Nigel Magnay" <[email protected]> wrote:
That whole section I find pretty bizarre.
- Apache is about (open-source) software.
- Writing code is *good*.
- Forks are *good*
*
*
I'm put in mind of Linus' talk about why git distribution is so
important -
that 'if you don't think I'm doing a good job, then you can just take
your
code from another maintainer. *That's* what keeps a project honest and
responsive to the users.
I would have thought that the kinds of people who are interested in
writing
maven-esque code would be some of the people you'd want on a PMC. If they
have a "long running fork" or a "reimplementation", surely they would be
lobbying for its integration? Merging is also good. If, despite this,
they're choosing to do this elsewhere, and/or are having trouble merging
projects in, isn't that a pretty sad indictment for the health of the
project? Isn't it a bit like saying "boo-hoo, those that are doing the
actual work might go work in their own sandpit if we won't play ball,
let's
ex-communicate them" ?
Unless (as some have suspected for a while) Apache isn't about software
anymore, it's about the continued existence of Apache (cfex:
OpenOffice).-
a political edifice where projects go to die. That's certainly what those
added paragraphs say to me.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Stephen Connolly <
[email protected]> wrote:
There are two schools of thought amongst the current members of this
projects PMC.
Without wanting to deliberately tip my hand and reveal where my opinion
is,
we would like to solicit the opinions if the community that we serve.
Please give us your thoughts.
The topic is essentially:
Do you want the members of the Maven PMC to be social leaders of the
Maven
community, who's actions demonstrate the best community behaviour?
The alternative is that members of the Maven PMC are here purely to
complete the legal requirements that an Apache TLP has delegated to
PMCs
This is not black and white... The answer can be grey... And everyone
is
human so can make mistakes...
So community, what are you expecting?
- Stephen Connolly
On Thursday, 25 July 2013, wrote:
Author: jdcasey
Date: Wed Jul 24 23:21:58 2013
New Revision: 1506778
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1506778
Log:
Adding section on PMC standards of community commitment
Modified:
maven/site/trunk/content/markdown/project-roles.md
Modified: maven/site/trunk/content/markdown/project-roles.md
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/site/trunk/content/markdown/project-roles.md?rev=1506778&r1=1506777&r2=1506778&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- maven/site/trunk/content/markdown/project-roles.md (original)
+++ maven/site/trunk/content/markdown/project-roles.md Wed Jul 24
23:21:58 2013
@@ -176,6 +176,29 @@ The Project Management Committee has the
* Voting on release artifacts.
* <!-- TODO: get the rest of these -->
+#### Standards for Community Commitment
+
--
Sent from my phone
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral
philosophy; that is,
the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
-- John Kenneth Galbraith
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: [email protected]
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
