Hi Alan, In Wink, you voted +1, and in Chukwa, you voted -1. While the status are similar between Chukwa and Wink, but what is the logic behind your votes? In addition, Chukwa and Kafka are similar, and some Kafka design are borrowed from Chukwa. Does your relationship with Kafka influence your judgement being bias toward Chukwa?
You called me a lone developer, while the jira list showed there are several others contributing as well. There are people submitting patches and open jira for discussions. You volunteered to work as mentor for Chukwa, but we only hear from you 4 times while being Chukwa mentor: 1. March 23, we welcome you to become Chukwa mentor. On the same day, you ask Chukwa to be retired. 2. June Report, Chris reviewed report, you gave a +1. 3. September 9, you said "thank you" to Bernd for follow up on granting new committers access. 4. Nov 16, you start on the private list on the same thread about retiring Chukwa. I am sorry, but I may be blunt. I think your action is harmful to Chukwa community rather than helping the community. In the Chukwa private mailing list, I also expressed my limitation to be contributing to Chukwa while I am working through logistics with my employer to get approval. While I did not write new code for Chukwa for the past half year, Chukwa continue to receive patches from the following individuals: Noel Duffy Jie Huang Sourygna Luangsay Abhijit Dhar Saisai Shao Ivy Tang Prakhar Srivastava Eric Speck Some patches are committed by Ari Rabkin. Contributions after 0.5 release can be tracked in CHANGES.txt. Chukwa is truly running as an open Apache project where patches are reviewed and discussed. Chukwa is used by Netflix, IBM, Intel, and several companies. If you search on LinkedIn, number of people that has Chukwa on their resume grown from 30 people in January to 55 now. The information are the same information that I provided on chukwa-private mailing list. Here is the quote from Chris: "Eric, you recommend graduating Chukwa to be a TLP based on its activity relative to other incubator projects, engagement from independent contributors, adoption and investment in commercial offerings, and indirect measures of a growing interest in the project. Is that a fair summary?" While Chukwa community is low key on participate political votes because the same rehash of closing the community has been on the focus since the original incubation proposal was written. If we are going to move forward, more time in incubation is not a realistic option. The only way is vote for graduation and avoid the vicious cycle of closing the project review. regards, Eric On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Alan Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com> wrote: > > On Nov 27, 2012, at 7:16 AM, ant elder wrote: > > > Unless there are compelling reason to stop, i.e continuing breaches of > > basic ASF polices and principles, then where possible letting a poddling > > continue incubation or just graduate seems better to me than making them > go > > elsewhere. Its not like a small slow problem is chewing up ASF resources, > > but i understand not everyone here agrees with my views on that. Wink is > an > > example of poddling in similar circumstances and there we are about to > have > > decided that graduation is better than retirement. Perhaps thats a better > > approach. I don't recall a graduation recommendation request from the > > Incubator has ever been rejected by the board so perhaps the Incubator is > > too conservative with graduation recommendations. > > > > Its interesting comparing Wink and Chukwa. From many perspectives Chukwa > is > > much more active than Wink but we're about to graduate Wink and talking > > about retiring this one. I've not yet had a chance to go through all the > > Chukwa archives but unless i'm misunderstanding something Chukwa isn't > just > > a lone coder, there have been several committers in the last months and > > while one is doing the majority of the commits many of those are actually > > applying patches from other people, so it looks like there are a bunch of > > people out there working on the project and we need to find ways of > better > > integrating them into the poddling community. > > This is an interesting line of reasoning worth pursuing, IMO. If Chukwa > and Wink are actually on a par with each other we should see if it make > sense to apply the same reasoning about Wink to Chukwa. > > Are we implicitly having a policy change with podlings, if so, should we > make it explicit? > > > Regards, > Alan > >
