Hi all, from my observations over the long time I was mentoring this project I can say it was always an up and down. People wanted to progress, but it never happened as day jobs prevented it. I think around the time Chrome introduced some tooling in that direction (even when its missing advanced mobile features) interest decreased even more.
Today I see not much activity. Personally I think a project like Ripple does not have a chance to build a vibrant community here. GitHub might be a better place, as there are no formalities involved. I am +1 for retiring the project. I am bit sad about this, as I always hoped the ASF would become a bit less Java centric, also bringing its benefits to other environments. Unfortunately I have not seen many successful web related projects (ignoring Cordova a little). Cheers, Christian -- Christian Grobmeier http://www.grobmeier.de http://www.timeandbill.de On Tue, Nov 17, 2015, at 00:50, Ross Gardler wrote: > Retiring it means the code is not being managed and thus there are no > changes to it in the ASF. > > People can fork the code and take it elsewhere, but not necessarily using > the name Ripple - approval would be required to take the name. Under no > circumstances would the name Apache Ripple be permitted. > > A project cannot stay in the incubator forever. Either there is an active > community around it (or work towards an active community) or it will be > retired from the incubator. There is activity on the code, but there is > no oversight on the health of the project and thus no real potential for > community growth. At this point the community is not large enough to must > the required oversight and thus cannot graduate. > > The existing community therefore need to evaluate whether Apache is the > right place for them. If the only goal is to fix bugs then I would > suggest it may not be an appropriate home. > > Ross > > -----Original Message----- > From: Parashuram N [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 3:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? > > Hi Ross, > > Thanks for bringing this up. I wanted to understand the implication of > retiring a project, vs graduating it. > Does retiring a project also mean that we cannot change the code, add bug > fixes, etc ? While you are right that there may be no big features > planned and that Ripple is largely complete for its use case, does > retiring mean that we cannot fix bugs ? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Gardler [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2015 11:38 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? > > (BCC private@IPMC as I am speaking as an IPMC member but will follow up > on the Ripple dev list as is appropriate) > > Hello Ripplers, please note the '?' in the subject. I just wanted to > ensure I got the attention of PPMC members because the IPMC is asking > this question and PPMC members need to respond. > > In February I stepped up to help the very small Ripple community get a > release out in response to the IPMC wondering whether the project had the > legs to graduate. With my offer to help the IPMC agreed to give the > podling time (6 months) before reviewing again. We are now at 10 months > from that date. > > Some great work by the Ripple team resulted in a few releases (including > that all important first release with the fine tuning that is initially > so time consuming). In addition a couple of new committers were added. > Today there is a slow trickle of work going on in JIRA and the codebase. > By my assessment the PPMC is in a reasonable shape, though it is not > large enough to graduate. But there is no obvious community action, i.e. > no visible interaction between contributors on the future of Ripple and > this no place for newcomers to engage. > > I recognize that the project is small and largely "complete" with respect > to its current use cases. It looks to be in maintenance mode. This is not > necessarily a problem. All we are looking for is a community that is > welcoming to newcomers. But it must also have appropriate oversight from > at least 3 active PPMC members (otherwise it can't get a release out the > door). I don't see that this will change unless the existing PPMC > actively seek to do so. > > Since Ripple is now 4 months overdue on its IPMC reports the IPMC is once > again wondering what is going on in the land of Ripple. > > Two things *must* happen: > > > 1) A discussion, on the public dev list, with respect to the health > of the Ripple project. This can take one of two angles, depending on the > needs of the active PPMC members here. It can be a proposal to retire the > project from the Incubator on the grounds that it will not be able to > muster enough interest to graduate, or it can be a discussion on the > short to medium term future of the project, along with a plan to grow the > PPMC to a suitable size to allow graduation. If the second option is > taken the goal should be to demonstrate activity with the project with > the explicit intention of drawing out any interested lurkers on the > mailing list. Only the PPMC members can make the call as to which is the > right approach. > > 2) An IPMC report must be submitted describing the state of the > project and highlighting the action taken in 1) along with a timeframe > before the project should be re-evaluated by the IPMC. > > Thanks, > Ross >
