And here as well, with the precise specification of at a minimum 3 independent committers:
> The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at > least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or > entity that is vital to the success of the project) http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Graduation+Requirements Martijn On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > On 11/08/2016 11:43 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: >> Besides, last time I checked there's no such thing as "diversity requirement" >> in the graduation. It is indeed being asked here and there, but so far it >> isn't an official IPMC requirement. > > It's very prominently displayed in our graduation guideline. > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community > >> >> And I'd hate to make a "diversity scape-goat" out of the project that has >> created a very welcome environment! >> >> Cos >> >> On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 02:14PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/07/2016 10:05 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> I was looking at Snoot, and some figures jumped at me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is the Podling (and the IPMC) satisfied that there is no concern with >>>>>>> people affiliated with a single company providing more than 90% of all >>>>>>> commits over the past year and, as far as I can tell, the vast majority >>>>>>> of tickets and email, as well as a 73% stake in the proposed PMC? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is the IPMC satisfied that, should this company opt to not further spend >>>>>>> resources on this project, that the project would still be as viable? >>>>>>> >>>>> Hi Daniel, >>>>> >>>>> I've observed this project since it joined the incubator and they've >>>>> worked >>>>> hard to create an open and welcoming community and to fix all the issues >>>>> raised that could be barriers to their graduation. >>>>> >>>>> In terms of percentages, these things have been debated previously in >>>>> graduation of projects such as Ignite, Flume, Tez etc and I'm not going to >>>>> repeat the arguments from those discussions. Geode would be better with >>>>> served with a wider community, but I think what matters is 1) have they >>>>> demonstrated the behaviors we expect and 2) are they moving in the right >>>>> direction. Geode is a great community and a pleasure to be involved with >>>>> and I would say yes to both of these. I believe they are going in the >>>>> right >>>>> direction to make this project less dependent on one company and except to >>>>> change the percentages you've pointed out, theres no purpose left for them >>>>> being in the incubator. They've shown that they can manage themselves and >>>>> theres enough independent oversight to mitigate concerns which is why I >>>>> think we should vote for them to graduate. >>>> >>>> Given the discussions around single-vendor projects that are raging on >>>> board@ I would have to agree with Daniel's concerns here. Projects that >>>> are heavily dominated by a single vendor/company/organization >>>> historically cause problems over time. >>> >>> I think that other discussion addresses a very different set of problems. >>> >>>> Is there a huge rush to get this project graduated? >>> >>> I'd rather flip your argument around and say: at this point sitting in the >>> Incubator adds no value to the project nor does it teach anything >>> new or useful to its PPMC or a community at large. >>> >>>> Surely we serve the >>>> Foundation, and this project, better, by ensuring that this problem >>>> (and, yes, it's a problem) is addressed before we grant them TLP status? >>> >>> I disagree. The Incubator is a place to make sure that the community >>> (regardless of its composition) truly understands and practices the >>> "Apache Way". As has been suggested on this thread by a number of >>> votes from project's mentors and IPMC members embedded in the >>> Geode community that mission has been accomplished. >>> >>> I see no reason to hold the project hostage over the diversity requirement >>> simply because it is pointless for IPMC, project and the foundation. >>> >>>> I'm personally less concerned with the sustainability of the project >>>> should the company opt out of working on the project, and more concerned >>>> with the kind of monoculture "we own it" problems that we're starting to >>>> see crop up in other projects that were allowed to graduate without >>>> building the community first. >>> >>> Then you really should be voting "yes" on this thread. There's a good number >>> of us on IPMC who believe that "we own it" is really not a problem with this >>> community. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Roman. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
