Report posted, thanks everyone On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 5:36 PM Michael Wall <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mike D, good catch. Our last report was due at the 18 Apr board meeting, > so I made a date range from 18 Apr to 17 Jul, which is the day before the > board meeting this month. Those number may fluctuate between now and the > board meeting time but should stay constant after the 17. To Mike Walch's > point, I summed the open and closed to get the total for created and closed > during the time range for both issues and PRs. > > Josh, added a comment that we will review the contributors before the next > meeting. Always happy to skip middle steps. > > Thanks guys. > > Mike > > -------------- > > [DRAFT] [REPORT] Apache Accumulo - July 2018 > > > The Apache Accumulo PMC decided to draft its quarterly board > reports on the dev list. Here is a draft of our report which is due > by Wednesday, Jul 11, 1 week before the board meeting on > Wednesday, Jul 18. Please let me know if you have any suggestions. > > I am a little earlier with this one since I will be on vacation 5-15 Jul. > My plan is to submit this report sometime on Mon, Jul 9. > > Mike > > ---------- > > ## Description: > > - The Apache Accumulo sorted, distributed key/value > store is a robust, scalable, high performance data storage system that > features cell-based access control and customizable server-side > processing. It is based on Google's BigTable design and is built on > top of Apache Hadoop, Zookeeper, and Thrift. > > ## Issues: > > - There are no issues requiring board attention at this time. > > ## Activity: > > - There were 2 new releases, Accumulo 1.9.0 and Accumulo 1.9.1 since > the last report. The 1.9.0 release [1] had a critical bug in the Write > Ahead Log (WAL) process that is fixed in 1.9.1 [2]. > - The PMC approved the use of the Apache Accumulo trademark for the > 5th annual Accumulo Summit, to be held on October 15, 2018 in Columbia, > MD. > - There were no new committers since the last report. All committers > are also PMC members. We will review contributors during the next 3 > months > to see if anyone should be invited to become a committer. > - The PMC decided to switch to using github issue for the project and all > subprojects [3], which is why the Jira activity dropped off. Github > issues > and pull request statistics are included below. > - Another bug has been found in the WAL process and a 1.9.2 is in the > works. > > ## Health report: > > - The project remains healthy. Activity levels on mailing lists, issues > and pull > requests remain constant. > > ## PMC changes: > > - Currently 34 PMC members. > - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months > - Last PMC addition was Nick Felts on Thu Mar 22 2018 > > ## Committer base changes: > > - See PMC changes, all committers are PMC members currently. > > ## Releases: > > - accumulo-1.9.0 was released on Tue Apr 17 2018 > - accumulo-1.9.1 was released on Sun May 13 2018 > > ## Mailing list activity: > > - Nothing significant in the figures > > ## Issue activity: > > - 49 issued created [4] and 28 closed [5] in the last 3 months > - 75 pull requests created [6] and 67 closed [7] in the last 3 months > > [1]: https://accumulo.apache.org/release/accumulo-1.9.0/ > [2]: https://accumulo.apache.org/release/accumulo-1.9.1/ > [3]: > https://accumulo.apache.org/blog/2018/03/16/moving-to-github-issues.html > [4]: > https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+created%3A2018-04-18..2018-07-17+ > [5]: > https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+closed%3A2018-04-18..2018-07-17+ > [6]: > https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+created%3A2018-04-18..2018-07-17+ > [7]: > https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pulls?q=is%3Apr+closed%3A2018-04-18..2018-07-17+ > > On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 5:14 PM Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On 7/9/18 4:54 PM, Michael Wall wrote: >> > Josh, I am not clear on what you are suggesting for another action item. >> > Are you suggesting a pass over contributors to add see if anyone should >> be >> > invited to become a committer or are you suggesting we revisit that >> every >> > committer becomes a PMC member? >> >> If we say that we have no added any new committers/PMC members in a long >> period of time, the board will most assuredly say "Have you looked at >> your contributors to see if you should invite some to be committers?" >> >> I was trying to suggest that we proactively tell them "we know we need >> to see if there are contributors to invite to be committers" in order to >> save that middle step. No need to do this -- just trying to be helpful >> based on what I see over and over again from the board :) >> >
