Maven is open source and anyone can do whatever they want with it.
That is the whole point of the Apache license.
If the code splits off and a new open source product emerges that is
better than Maven, then we all win.
To prevent this, the Maven PMC has to make the right choices about the
Maven roadmap and make sure that the committers see a vision that they
regard as worth devoting time to.
If the code splits off and a commercial product emerges, how does that
affect Maven? Why would it be better if the person was not on the PMC?
If the code splits and the PMC was right about the proper strategy, the
fork will die a natural death or become a niche solution which may take
pressure of the Maven PMC to handle special cases that are not important
to the main user community.
The people who want to pursue a fork will do that anyway so whether they
stay in the PMC or do not, makes no difference to the Maven team.
The wider community will go with the better package so the Maven PMC has
to make good choices.
Ron
On 25/07/2013 5:55 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
Agreed. I'll tip my hand and give my opinion: PMC members should have an
"Apache first" mentality. They are gatekeepers and guardians of their
project. Spinning off critical code to other OSS organizations should be
frowned upon -- it splits the development and wider community into smaller
pieces.
NB: My original response was just criticism of the commitment wording. It's
nice to say what commitments PMC members should have, but if there's no way
to enforce it, it puts into question why the commitments are even expected.
AFAIK, merit at Apache is forever -- you can't have it undone. If someone
loses their "Apache first" spirit and begins critical development
elsewhere, what can be done about it? Are there any practical recourses? I
don't think there is which is why Maven development has that problem today.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 4:36 PM, John Casey <[email protected]> wrote:
On 7/25/13 4:17 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
Stephen, those are great questions. Yet, I think these questions are
riding
an assumption that PMC members are solely volunteering at Apache, because
the emphasis (as I interpret your words) is to place the Apache project
first/above other external contributions. Isn't that the heart of this
debate? A person who solely contributes to Apache and no other OS
organizations has no divided loyalties -- they do all their work here. But
what happens when contributions are here and elsewhere? I ask
rhetorically,
to solicit answers, of course... and I see where this is going and what
historical processes within Maven are being addressed.
I don't think it's about whether you contribute elsewhere or not. It's
about whether you expect to do a ton of work outside the community here,
outside the commit logs and the review, in order to avoid the discussion
and potential for veto.
Working in this way opens the possibility for changing the rules for who
gets to contribute, especially when code diverges for long periods then
gets reconciled with a massive rebase.
ASF is supposed to be about more than code. We're supposed to be working
together on this project. I feel like the above hamstrings that whole
process.
And note: I'm only suggesting that the PMC - who is supposed to have the
long-term interests of *this* project at heart - be held to a higher
standard, to provide an example for the rest of the project. This is not
saying you're stuck working solely within Maven just because you're on the
PMC; it's saying that you should promote the health of the community by
making sure the processes in place work as well as possible.
ASF membership is supposed to be reserved for those who "get" the Apache
Way, and I've heard it said that PMC membership should imply ASF
membership. IMO, working for extended periods outside of the venues for our
community is not consistent with having the best interests of this project
in mind.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.**com <[email protected]>>
wrote:
Perhaps we could reframe the question a little then (as people seem to be
testing hung up on the committed wording)...
Should the PMC encourage people experimenting on new improvements to
Maven
to do that work at the ASF? And if so, should they then practice what
they
preach, and ensure that any experiments with Maven take place on the ASF
SCM servers (at least once such experiments become semi-serious or
progress
enough not to cause egg-on-face syndrome)?
Shoud the PMC promote other Apache projects, or moving non-Apache
projects
to Apache? (Right now, to work on an issue in core and effect the change
yourself you may need to establish merit with: Apache Maven, Eclipse
Sisu,
Eclipse Aether, Plexus, Apache Commons, Classworlds, etc. Now it may be
fine with half of these at Eclipse and the ther half here... Or maybe
not... But that is a lot of projects where you need to establish merit
and
perhaps maintain merit just to be able to commit directly (which
sometimes
is the only way to effect the type of cross system changes that some of
our
more obscure bugs may require... GIT makes this less of a requirement, as
patches on SVN are a PITA, though) )
These types of questions need resolution as they will, further down the
road, rise up again and cause wounds... Eg logback vs log4j2 is one that
simmers at the edge (any time anyone mentioned coloured loggers)
-Stephen
On Thursday, 25 July 2013, Paul Benedict wrote:
I don't think it is possible to force volunteer efforts and/or limit
development elsewhere. The idea of supporting a project is a vague
notion.
I have my opinions too but this language is clearly unenforceable and
impractical.
Cheers,
Paul
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Markus Karg <[email protected]> wrote:
As a Maven user I think that everybody who is working on a project
should
behave the same. Hence, I would say, PMC members should rather
certainly
demonstrate how to live the community rules.
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Stephen Connolly
[mailto:stephen.alan.connolly@**gmail.com<[email protected]>
]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. Juli 2013 15:16
An: Maven Users List; Maven Developers List
Betreff: [DISCUSS] Should the Maven PMC be an example of how we want
the
Maven Community to behave (was Re: svn commit: r1506778 -
/maven/site/trunk/content/**markdown/project-roles.md)
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<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/site/trunk/content/markdown/project>
-roles.md?rev=1506778&r1=**1506777&r2=1506778&view=diff<http://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
+
+In the spirit of supporting the health of our community, Project
+Management Committee members refrain from actions that subvert the
+functioning of the committee itself.
+
+First, Project Management Committee members should not maintain
long-running
+forks of Maven code outside of the project itself. Making
significant
+changes to Maven code outside of the project displays a lack of
+investment in the community. Additionally, attempting to
re-integrate
+a large number of code changes in bulk overwhelms the ability of
+volunteers in the community to review (and potentially veto) the
+changes. This effectively thwarts the policing function of the PMC.
+
+Second, Project Management Committee members should not divert work
+on redesigning, reimplementing, or improving Maven code to
+alternative projects outside of this community for the purposes of
+reintroducing them as replacement for existing Maven code. While
+there is a danger he> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[email protected].**org
<[email protected]><javascript:;>
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
<javascript:;>
--
Cheers,
Paul
--
Sent from my phone
--
John Casey
GitHub - http://github.com/jdcasey
--
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]
