I appreciate the desire to go through Incubator. Maybe our concerns are out-dated. I'll circulate this around Netflix and get some responses.
WRT committer status, I don't see how it can work without us being committers to Curator. If we're not committers, we'll need to fork it internally and I've already gotten a lot of negative feedback on that (there are a lot of former Yahoo-ers here). -JZ On 12/28/11 10:02 AM, "Patrick Hunt" <[email protected]> wrote: >I wanted to share this section of my recent report to the board (I've >also gotten permission to share the board's response) > >> A discussion is currently under way regarding the possibility of> >>merging the recently open sourced "Curator" source base from> Netflix. >>These are client implementations of ZooKeeper "recipes"> (e.g. >>leadership election, group membership, etc...) which simplify> the act >>of using ZooKeeper in client side applications.>> The authors of Curator >>are unwilling to join the incubator, this is> based on their past >>experience as well as some of the ongoing issues> they are seeing wrt >>projects entering the incubator. They have> expressed a preference to >>come in either as a subproject or as a> separate release artifact of the >>TLP. > >to which the board responded: > >Doug Cutting (chairman): >+ Long-term, do you think that Curator will have an >+ indepdendent community from Zookeeper? If so, then it >+ ought to enter through the Incubator. If not then the >+ code might still enter through the incubator for >+ resolution of IP issues, but then transfer relatively >+ quickly to live under the Zookeeper PMC. Or the >+ Zookeeper PMC could directly adopt the code, although >+ you might not immediately add its committers to the >+ project but rather have them first contribute patches >+ through the normal process until their community merit >+ is established. > >Sam Ruby: >+ suggested that the "short form" of the incubator's IP clearance >process would be appropriate if Zookeeper directly adopts this code. > >The short form can be found here: >http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html > >I personally still feel that incubator is the best place for starting >this. I have a good track record as a podling mentor and I feel >strongly that we could quickly/successfully incubate this project and >graduate (given there's strong leadership by the Curator committers >themselves). > >Patrick > >On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Jordan Zimmerman ><[email protected]> wrote: >> Any other comments on this? If not, what should the next steps be? >> >> -JZ >> >> On 12/15/11 10:07 AM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>I'd be happy to have Ted as both committer and mentor. I'd be happy to >>>have Patrick and/or as mentor as well. >>> >>>-JZ >>> >>>On 12/14/11 7:03 PM, "Ted Dunning" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Jordan, Here is some feedback. I like the proposal and it makes >>>>>sense >>>>> to have such a project as either sub-project or incubator. I have a >>>>>few >>>>> concerns, though: >>>>> >>>>> 1- I haven't been following closely the development of the recipes, >>>>>but >>>>>I >>>>> wonder if it really makes sense to deprecate the current ones in >>>>>favor >>>>>of >>>>> Curator's, or if it is a better idea to keep multiple versions in the >>>>>case >>>>> of duplicates. People in the community have spent time on the current >>>>> recipes, so I don't like very much the idea of dropping the current >>>>>recipes >>>>> without some evidence that the community accepts it. Note that I'm >>>>>not >>>>> saying that deprecating is not the right thing to do, I'm simply >>>>>saying >>>>> that we need to make sure that the community agrees. >>>>> >>>> >>>>I agree that not deprecating is a good thing. We could mark them with >>>>annotations that indicate that we haven't heard yet from a community of >>>>users. If we don't hear about significant usage, then deprecation >>>>might >>>>be >>>>warranted. >>>> >>>>2- The set of committers needs to be more diverse. Perhaps it would be >>>>> easier to find more committers if you follow the incubation process, >>>>>given >>>>> that typically people sign up for committership once you post a >>>>>proposal >>>>> there. I wonder how many other people on this list would like to >>>>>volunteer >>>>> to become a committer of Curator, though. I like the project, but >>>>> unfortunately I don't have the cycles to do it. >>>>> >>>> >>>>I would volunteer. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 3- If Curator becomes a sub-project of ZooKeeper, then you need at >>>>>least >>>>> one mentor. Is there anyone who would like to sign up to mentor >>>>>Curator? >>>>> >>>> >>>>Likewise. >>> >>> >> >
