Btw both the contribution activity in JSR 382 (see before) and MicroProfile Config: https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-config/graphs/contributors have massively decreased since a peak about a year ago. And there are just 2 who contributed more than 5k LOC, 2 (including John) with up to 1.5k LOC and the rests is irrelevant with sometimes only a character or two contributed.
Compared to both of them Tamaya looks quite good: https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/graphs/contributors 2 contributed over 20k LOC, 1 over 5k and 2 others over 1.5k over the history of the project. I did not realize how much William has done, so why haven't we voted on his committer role already? Werner On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 4:32 PM Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > Phil mentioned two possible committers. > Not sure if they meet requirements by ASF based on their existing > contributions like JIRA, etc. to be nominated right now? > > Anatole mentioned support for both JSR 382 and MicroProfile config. > However the Config standardization efforts are totally fragmented between > JSR 382, MicroProfile Config and a few others like DeltaSpike. > MicroProfile Config like most MP efforts is a 1-3 person gig, so not much > difference to Tamaya. The JSR is canibalized by that because the same > people have to take care of both: > https://github.com/eclipse/ConfigJSR/graphs/contributors shows there are > just 2 who contributed beyond 5k LOC, one about 1.5k and everyone else less > than half of that at most. > The JSR should long have undergone a Renewal Ballot as per JCP.next rules > (it's 13 months now since the creation on Oct 9, 2017, JCP.next mandates a > Renewal Ballot after 9 months) but nobody seems to have started that, nor > is Spec Lead organization Eclipse sure, what to do with it. I know from the > Jakarta EE Spec Committee, that David/Tomitribe put the idea of a > "jakarta.config" on the table, but that has not been decided on either. > MicroProfile Config will never be a "standard", so the decision is between > putting enough life into the JSR to pass the Renewal Ballot and go Final > and Withdraw it. > > Then a downstream project like Tamaya had to implement yet another 3rd API > and abandon at least one or both others it used so far. > I don't think the pressure is really on Tamaya at this point and it seems > the decisions for the Config spec will be made any time soon. > > So taking the offer of two or three committers looks like a good idea. > IMO I would mention the upstream config API problem in a few words, it is > nothing Tamaya itself can solve, but it has an impact also on the pace at > which new releases make sense. > > Regards, > > Werner > > > > > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 5:50 AM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> I've signed off on the report. However, there were a lot of merge >> conflicts so if you could please double check. >> >> I'm concerned about the strength of the project. It's basically a 2 >> person >> team. What can we do to try to grow the community? >> >> John >> >> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 5:36 PM P. Ottlinger <pottlin...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >> > Am 06.11.18 um 22:06 schrieb Justin Mclean: >> > > Just a friendly reminder that the report is due today - don't forget >> to >> > submit it. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > done: >> > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/November2018 >> > >> > n8 >> > Phil >> > >> >
