Hey Greg, Regarding subversion - I think the reference is to partial vs full committers here: https://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/roles.html
- Patrick On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > -1 (non-binding) > > This is an idea that runs COMPLETELY counter to the Apache Way, and is > to be severely frowned up. This creates *unequal* ownership of the > codebase. > > Each Member of the PMC should have *equal* rights to all areas of the > codebase until their purview. It should not be subjected to others' > "ownership" except throught the standard mechanisms of reviews and > if/when absolutely necessary, to vetos. > > Apache does not want "leads", "benevolent dictators" or "assigned > maintainers", no matter how you may dress it up with multiple > maintainers per component. The fact is that this creates an unequal > level of ownership and responsibility. The Board has shut down > projects that attempted or allowed for "Leads". Just a few months ago, > there was a problem with somebody calling themself a "Lead". > > I don't know why you suggest that Apache Subversion does this. We > absolutely do not. Never have. Never will. The Subversion codebase is > owned by all of us, and we all care for every line of it. Some people > know more than others, of course. But any one of us, can change any > part, without being subjected to a "maintainer". Of course, we ask > people with more knowledge of the component when we feel > uncomfortable, but we also know when it is safe or not to make a > specific change. And *always*, our fellow committers can review our > work and let us know when we've done something wrong. > > Equal ownership reduces fiefdoms, enhances a feeling of community and > project ownership, and creates a more open and inviting project. > > So again: -1 on this entire concept. Not good, to be polite. > > Regards, > Greg Stein > Director, Vice Chairman > Apache Software Foundation > > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 05:31:58PM -0800, Matei Zaharia wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I wanted to share a discussion we've been having on the PMC list, as well as >> call for an official vote on it on a public list. Basically, as the Spark >> project scales up, we need to define a model to make sure there is still >> great oversight of key components (in particular internal architecture and >> public APIs), and to this end I've proposed implementing a maintainer model >> for some of these components, similar to other large projects. >> >> As background on this, Spark has grown a lot since joining Apache. We've had >> over 80 contributors/month for the past 3 months, which I believe makes us >> the most active project in contributors/month at Apache, as well as over 500 >> patches/month. The codebase has also grown significantly, with new libraries >> for SQL, ML, graphs and more. >> >> In this kind of large project, one common way to scale development is to >> assign "maintainers" to oversee key components, where each patch to that >> component needs to get sign-off from at least one of its maintainers. Most >> existing large projects do this -- at Apache, some large ones with this >> model are CloudStack (the second-most active project overall), Subversion, >> and Kafka, and other examples include Linux and Python. This is also >> by-and-large how Spark operates today -- most components have a de-facto >> maintainer. >> >> IMO, adopting this model would have two benefits: >> >> 1) Consistent oversight of design for that component, especially regarding >> architecture and API. This process would ensure that the component's >> maintainers see all proposed changes and consider them to fit together in a >> good way. >> >> 2) More structure for new contributors and committers -- in particular, it >> would be easy to look up who's responsible for each module and ask them for >> reviews, etc, rather than having patches slip between the cracks. >> >> We'd like to start with in a light-weight manner, where the model only >> applies to certain key components (e.g. scheduler, shuffle) and user-facing >> APIs (MLlib, GraphX, etc). Over time, as the project grows, we can expand it >> if we deem it useful. The specific mechanics would be as follows: >> >> - Some components in Spark will have maintainers assigned to them, where one >> of the maintainers needs to sign off on each patch to the component. >> - Each component with maintainers will have at least 2 maintainers. >> - Maintainers will be assigned from the most active and knowledgeable >> committers on that component by the PMC. The PMC can vote to add / remove >> maintainers, and maintained components, through consensus. >> - Maintainers are expected to be active in responding to patches for their >> components, though they do not need to be the main reviewers for them (e.g. >> they might just sign off on architecture / API). To prevent inactive >> maintainers from blocking the project, if a maintainer isn't responding in a >> reasonable time period (say 2 weeks), other committers can merge the patch, >> and the PMC will want to discuss adding another maintainer. >> >> If you'd like to see examples for this model, check out the following >> projects: >> - CloudStack: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Maintainers+Guide >> >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Maintainers+Guide> >> - Subversion: https://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/roles.html >> <https://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/roles.html> >> >> Finally, I wanted to list our current proposal for initial components and >> maintainers. It would be good to get feedback on other components we might >> add, but please note that personnel discussions (e.g. "I don't think Matei >> should maintain *that* component) should only happen on the private list. >> The initial components were chosen to include all public APIs and the main >> core components, and the maintainers were chosen from the most active >> contributors to those modules. >> >> - Spark core public API: Matei, Patrick, Reynold >> - Job scheduler: Matei, Kay, Patrick >> - Shuffle and network: Reynold, Aaron, Matei >> - Block manager: Reynold, Aaron >> - YARN: Tom, Andrew Or >> - Python: Josh, Matei >> - MLlib: Xiangrui, Matei >> - SQL: Michael, Reynold >> - Streaming: TD, Matei >> - GraphX: Ankur, Joey, Reynold >> >> I'd like to formally call a [VOTE] on this model, to last 72 hours. The >> [VOTE] will end on Nov 8, 2014 at 6 PM PST. >> >> Matei > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
