Here's an idea: how about you guys fill out the maturity model template? I really liked how it turned out during the Groovy graduation discussion and perhaps it can help here as well.
JIRA vs. MLs is but a single facet of how a project practices "Apache Way". Personally I'd like to see more data points. Thanks, Roman. On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Vinod Vavilapalli <vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > Many of the active TLPs do tend to center all project discussions on JIRA as > opposed to mailing lists. OTOH, non-code discussions are usually best served > on mailing lists. > > Instead of making it a JIRA vs mailing list discussion, how about the podling > be advised about putting a cool-off period for JIRA resolutions - 24-36hrs > before they get closed. Again, this is something a bunch of active TLPs > practice in the interest of leaving enough time windows for everyone (many > times around the world in different time-zones) to pitch in. > > +Vinod > > >> On Nov 2, 2015, at 3:59 AM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm one of the mentors of Sentry, which has been in incubation for some >> time. The project has progressed in a number of ways, but my largest >> concern is that the podling is doing [in my opinion] too much >> development and discussion out-of-sight. >> >> I've raised issues about this, as has David Nalley. David had a >> conversation with members of Sentry at ApacheCon Big Data in September, >> and that discussion was brought back to the list. [1] >> >> Jiras are being filed, and swiftly acted on, in a way that strongly >> suggests that a lot of discussion and direction of the project are >> happening off-list and out-of-sight to the average participant. David >> and myself have suggested ways that the community can remedy this, but >> the most recent mail from Arvind indicates that he (and others in the >> podling) don't feel it is a "valid ask." >> >> At this point, I'm raising this to general@ because I'd like second (and >> third, etc.) opinions. Perhaps I'm deeply wrong, and others here feel >> Sentry is ready to graduate. My feeling is that the podling is not >> operating in "the Apache Way" and doesn't show a great deal of interest >> in doing so. [2] To quote Arvind: >> >> "I feel another issue being pointed out or which has been eluded to in >> the past is - who decides which Jiras should be fixed, what features to >> create etc, specially when they show up as Jira issues directly with >> patches that follow soon. It seems that in some ways the lack of using >> mailing lists directly for discussion is linked to this behavior of >> filing issues and fixing them rapidly, as if following a roadmap that >> the community does not have control over. Please pardon me if my >> interpretation/understanding of the issue is not right. But if it is >> right, then I do want to say that - that too is not an issue in my >> opinion at all. And here is why: >> >> When someone files a Jira, they are inviting the entire community to >> comment on it and provide feedback. If it is not in the interest of the >> project, I do believe that responsible members of the community will be >> quick to bring that out for discussion and even Veto it if necessary. If >> that is not happening, it is not an issue with lack of community >> participation, but rather it is an indicator of a project team that >> knows where the gaps are and understands how to go about filling them >> intuitively." >> >> The model that Sentry is pursing may work very well *for the existing >> members of the podling.* In my opinion, its process is entirely too >> opaque to allow for interested parties outside of the existing podling >> and companies interested in Sentry development to become involved. >> >> The podling is pressing to move to graduation, and I cannot in good >> conscience vote +1 or even +0 at this point. I'm strongly -1 as a mentor >> and don't feel the podling has any interest in working in "the Apache >> Way" as commonly understood. [3] >> >> However, I feel we've reached an impasse and there's little value in >> continuing to debate amongst the mentors / podling. They've stated their >> position(s) and I've stated mine. (I *think* David Nalley is in >> agreement with me, but I don't wish to speak for him.) >> >> I'm bringing this to the IPMC fully understanding that I might be >> totally wrong - maybe I'm holding to a too strict or outdated idea of >> how projects should operate. I'm happy to be told so if that's the case >> so I can improve as a mentor or decide to bow out from mentoring in the >> future, if it's the case that my idea of a project is out-of-line with >> the majority here. >> >> [1] http://s.apache.org/611 >> [2] http://s.apache.org/bhQ >> [3] http://theapacheway.com/ >> >> Best, >> >> jzb >> -- >> Joe Brockmeier >> j...@zonker.net >> Twitter: @jzb >> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
