Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Greg Stein]

If the podling *has* cleared all IP, then I could see allowing it. But we
certainly don't want improper IP residing in the Attic. These aren't Apache
projects until graduation, so don't really belong. I can see releases
strengthening the argument for archival.

Henri should be able to clarify.

Cheers,
-g
On Sep 5, 2015 3:35 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:

> I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If
> that is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the
> correction.
>
> What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain
> name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> >
> > The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed.
> >> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Rob,
>  On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>  On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament 
>  wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
> >
> > This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month
> they
> > filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
>  mailing
> > list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years,
> but
>  from
> > what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to
> seek
> > input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe
> >> get
> > help for this podling.
> >
> > John
> 
> 
>  I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
>  that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
>  time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
> 
>  1) We've done a few podling releases.
> 
>  2) IP review is in good shape
> 
>  3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
> 
>  4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
>  has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
> 
>  5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
>  and occasional patch submissions
> >>>
> >>> I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
> >>> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably
> >> not a
> >>> good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off
> >> on.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> 
>  These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
>  thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
>  sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
>  developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
>  when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
>  with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
>  that makes a sustainable community.
> 
>  I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
>  project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
>  but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
>  community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
>  with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
>  of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
>  of the ODF Toolkit.
> >>>
> >>> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
> >>> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.
> >>
> >> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The
> >> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to
> put it
> >> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer.
> >>
> >> This is decision for the community such as it is to make.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> 
>  Regards,
> 
>  -Rob
> 
>  -
>  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
>
>

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Ian C]

As this discussion is taking place someone just asked to join the project

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If that 
> is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the correction.
>
> What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain 
> name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
>>
>> The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed.
>>> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
 On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:

 Hi Rob,
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
>>
>> This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month they
>> filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
> mailing
>> list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but
> from
>> what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to seek
>> input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe
>>> get
>> help for this podling.
>>
>> John
>
>
> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
> time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
>
> 1) We've done a few podling releases.
>
> 2) IP review is in good shape
>
> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
>
> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
>
> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
> and occasional patch submissions

 I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
 shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably
>>> not a
 good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off
>>> on.




>
> These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
> sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
> developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
> when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
> that makes a sustainable community.
>
> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
> project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
> community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
> of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
> of the ODF Toolkit.

 The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
 attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.
>>>
>>> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The
>>> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to put it
>>> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer.
>>>
>>> This is decision for the community such as it is to make.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>


>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> -
> 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
>



-- 
Cheers,

Ian C

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Dave Fisher]

Thanks.

Regarding domain names that's good advice. Should retirement happen we can 
follow that course.

There seems to be fresh blood in the project. We will need to see.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 5, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Henri Yandell  wrote:
> 
> I don't see any project within the Attic that came there from the
> Incubator.
> 
> If one did, it should have passed its IP items already.
> 
> My opinion on domain names for a project not graduating is that we give it
> back to who gave it to us, or if they don't want it back, let them decide
> who we should give it to.
> 
> Hen
> 
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Greg Stein  wrote:
>> 
>> If the podling *has* cleared all IP, then I could see allowing it. But we
>> certainly don't want improper IP residing in the Attic. These aren't Apache
>> projects until graduation, so don't really belong. I can see releases
>> strengthening the argument for archival.
>> 
>> Henri should be able to clarify.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> -g
>>> On Sep 5, 2015 3:35 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If
>>> that is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the
>>> correction.
>>> 
>>> What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain
>>> name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
 On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
 
 The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed.
> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament 
>>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Rob,
>>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament >> wrote:
 All,
 
 I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
 
 This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month
>>> they
 filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
>>> mailing
 list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years,
>>> but
>>> from
 what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to
>>> seek
 input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and
>>> maybe
> get
 help for this podling.
 
 John
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have
>>> noticed
>>> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
>>> time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
>>> 
>>> 1) We've done a few podling releases.
>>> 
>>> 2) IP review is in good shape
>>> 
>>> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
>>> 
>>> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
>>> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
>>> 
>>> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
>>> and occasional patch submissions
>> 
>> I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
>> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably
> not a
>> good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed
>>> off
> on.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
>>> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
>>> sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
>>> developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
>>> when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
>>> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
>>> that makes a sustainable community.
>>> 
>>> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
>>> project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one
>>> option,
>>> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
>>> community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
>>> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
>>> of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the
>>> death
>>> of the ODF Toolkit.
>> 
>> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
>> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.
> 
> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The
> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to
>>> put it
> in the attic as 

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Henri Yandell]

I don't see any project within the Attic that came there from the
Incubator.

If one did, it should have passed its IP items already.

My opinion on domain names for a project not graduating is that we give it
back to who gave it to us, or if they don't want it back, let them decide
who we should give it to.

Hen

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Greg Stein  wrote:

> If the podling *has* cleared all IP, then I could see allowing it. But we
> certainly don't want improper IP residing in the Attic. These aren't Apache
> projects until graduation, so don't really belong. I can see releases
> strengthening the argument for archival.
>
> Henri should be able to clarify.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
> On Sep 5, 2015 3:35 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
>
>> I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If
>> that is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the
>> correction.
>>
>> What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain
>> name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
>> >
>> > The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed.
>> >> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>
>> >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament 
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Rob,
>>  On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
>> 
>>  On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament > >
>>  wrote:
>> > All,
>> >
>> > I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
>> >
>> > This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month
>> they
>> > filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
>>  mailing
>> > list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years,
>> but
>>  from
>> > what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to
>> seek
>> > input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and
>> maybe
>> >> get
>> > help for this podling.
>> >
>> > John
>> 
>> 
>>  I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have
>> noticed
>>  that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
>>  time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
>> 
>>  1) We've done a few podling releases.
>> 
>>  2) IP review is in good shape
>> 
>>  3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
>> 
>>  4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
>>  has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
>> 
>>  5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
>>  and occasional patch submissions
>> >>>
>> >>> I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
>> >>> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably
>> >> not a
>> >>> good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed
>> off
>> >> on.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> 
>>  These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
>>  thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
>>  sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
>>  developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
>>  when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
>>  with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
>>  that makes a sustainable community.
>> 
>>  I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
>>  project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one
>> option,
>>  but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
>>  community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
>>  with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
>>  of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the
>> death
>>  of the ODF Toolkit.
>> >>>
>> >>> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
>> >>> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.
>> >>
>> >> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The
>> >> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to
>> put it
>> >> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer.
>> >>
>> >> This is decision for the community such as it is to make.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Dave
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> 
>>  Regards,
>> 
>>  -Rob
>> 
>>  -
>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> 

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Dave Fisher]

I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If that is 
not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the correction.

What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain name 
offtoolkit.org. What happens to that?

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> 
> The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed.
>> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Rob,
 On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
 
 On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament 
 wrote:
> All,
> 
> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
> 
> This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month they
> filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
 mailing
> list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but
 from
> what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to seek
> input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe
>> get
> help for this podling.
> 
> John
 
 
 I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
 that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
 time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
 
 1) We've done a few podling releases.
 
 2) IP review is in good shape
 
 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
 
 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
 has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
 
 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
 and occasional patch submissions
>>> 
>>> I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
>>> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably
>> not a
>>> good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off
>> on.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 
 These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
 thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
 sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
 developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
 when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
 with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
 that makes a sustainable community.
 
 I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
 project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
 but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
 community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
 with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
 of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
 of the ODF Toolkit.
>>> 
>>> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
>>> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.
>> 
>> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The
>> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to put it
>> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer.
>> 
>> This is decision for the community such as it is to make.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 
 Regards,
 
 -Rob
 
 -
 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

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Rob Weir]

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> All,
>
> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
>
> This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month they
> filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the mailing
> list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but from
> what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to seek
> input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe get
> help for this podling.
>
> John


I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:

1) We've done a few podling releases.

2) IP review is in good shape

3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions

4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.

5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
and occasional patch submissions

These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
that makes a sustainable community.

I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
of the ODF Toolkit.

Regards,

-Rob

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[John D. Ament]

Hi Rob,
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
> >
> > This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month they
> > filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
> mailing
> > list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but
> from
> > what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to seek
> > input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe get
> > help for this podling.
> >
> > John
>
>
> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
> time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
>
> 1) We've done a few podling releases.
>
> 2) IP review is in good shape
>
> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
>
> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
>
> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
> and occasional patch submissions
>

I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably not a
good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off on.




>
> These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
> sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
> developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
> when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
> that makes a sustainable community.
>
> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
> project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
> community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
> of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
> of the ODF Toolkit.
>

The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.


>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Pierre Smits]

This call for help points out that going through the incubation is more
than just adopting the Apache Way and turning out releases. Developing the
community is critical and communication is key to that.

I wonder about what has been done in that area and whether there are
lessons that can be learned from this podling.
Maybe it is not too late for the OFDF-Toolkit project, when
communication/marketing starts now surrounding the OFD PluginFest to create
more awareness.

Is, by any chance, anybody from the podling or the greater ASF community
attending the event? If so, maybe those could report here whether the
podling still has a fighting chance or that it is indeed time for the attic
route.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM *
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts  wrote:

>
> > On 02 Sep 15, at 21:51, Ian C  wrote:
> >
> > Before moving it to the attic is there anything that can be done to
> > publicise the need for people and try to attract them?
> > I would love to see it continue.
>
> The philosophical issues—differences, they’re pretty deep—as well as the
> technological preferences, make stitching ODF Toolkit onto Corinthia a
> problem. One could also suggest adding it to AOO. In fact, that’d be a more
> logical fit.
>
> As to reviving the actual podling. There is the upcoming ODF Plugfest.
> Attendees, participants include stakeholders in ODF, at least those with
> travel grants.
>
> louis
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Greg Stein]

The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed.
On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:

>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament 
> >> wrote:
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
> >>>
> >>> This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month they
> >>> filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
> >> mailing
> >>> list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but
> >> from
> >>> what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to seek
> >>> input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe
> get
> >>> help for this podling.
> >>>
> >>> John
> >>
> >>
> >> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
> >> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
> >> time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
> >>
> >> 1) We've done a few podling releases.
> >>
> >> 2) IP review is in good shape
> >>
> >> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
> >>
> >> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
> >> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
> >>
> >> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
> >> and occasional patch submissions
> >
> > I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
> > shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably
> not a
> > good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off
> on.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
> >> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
> >> sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
> >> developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
> >> when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
> >> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
> >> that makes a sustainable community.
> >>
> >> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
> >> project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
> >> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
> >> community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
> >> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
> >> of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
> >> of the ODF Toolkit.
> >
> > The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
> > attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.
>
> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The
> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to put it
> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer.
>
> This is decision for the community such as it is to make.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> -
> >> 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
>
>

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> 
> Hi Rob,
>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir  wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament 
>> wrote:
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
>>> 
>>> This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now.  Last month they
>>> filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the
>> mailing
>>> list.  They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but
>> from
>>> what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth.  I'd like to seek
>>> input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe get
>>> help for this podling.
>>> 
>>> John
>> 
>> 
>> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month.  You may have noticed
>> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some
>> time now.   I'd sum up accomplishments to date as:
>> 
>> 1) We've done a few podling releases.
>> 
>> 2) IP review is in good shape
>> 
>> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions
>> 
>> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but
>> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers.
>> 
>> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list
>> and occasional patch submissions
> 
> I have noticed that.  Has the podling been made aware that the report
> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably not a
> good sign?  It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> These are all good steps towards graduation.  However, the community
>> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to
>> sustain a TLP.   If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active
>> developers we would be in great shape.  As mentor I've given advice
>> when asked, and when I thought needed.  But I'm not standing there
>> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do.   I don't think
>> that makes a sustainable community.
>> 
>> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another
>> project (or Podling) really solves anything.  The Attic is one option,
>> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small)
>> community.  They would probably just set up on github and continue
>> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside
>> of Apache.  So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death
>> of the ODF Toolkit.
> 
> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other
> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed.

Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The 
incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to put it in 
the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer.

This is decision for the community such as it is to make.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>> -
>> 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

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Louis Suárez-Potts]

> On 02 Sep 15, at 10:28, toki  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 02/09/15 10:25, John D. Ament wrote:
> 
>> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
> 
> This project has been torn between going to the attic, or becoming a
> sub-project of another project, since at least January 2014.
> 
> IMNSHO, it should go to the attic, with Apache Corinthia picking up
> whatever code ODF Toolkit created that it (Corinthia) can use.

I’d agree. Far as I can tell, the only substantial difference for ODF Toolkit 
would be that no one would have to not write non-reports nor would anyone have 
to agonise over what has not been done.

Plus, Corinthia could benefit by attracting more interest among those 
interested in ODF.

-louis
> 
> jonathon
> 
> -
> 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

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[jan i]

On 2 September 2015 at 17:11, Louis Suárez-Potts  wrote:

>
> > On 02 Sep 15, at 10:28, toki  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 02/09/15 10:25, John D. Ament wrote:
> >
> >> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
> >
> > This project has been torn between going to the attic, or becoming a
> > sub-project of another project, since at least January 2014.
> >
> > IMNSHO, it should go to the attic, with Apache Corinthia picking up
> > whatever code ODF Toolkit created that it (Corinthia) can use.
>
> I’d agree. Far as I can tell, the only substantial difference for ODF
> Toolkit would be that no one would have to not write non-reports nor would
> anyone have to agonise over what has not been done.
>
> Plus, Corinthia could benefit by attracting more interest among those
> interested in ODF.
>
As far as I can see ODF Toolkit is written in Java, so it is not that easy
to use the code.

The philosophy of ODF Toolkit also seems quite different than the
filters/lenses of Corinthia.

But of course corinthia need all the positive attention it can get.

rgds
jan i

>
> -louis
> >
> > jonathon
> >
> > -
> > 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
>
>

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Ian C]

Hi All,

I wrote the last none mentor signed off report for the ODF Toolit.

It has been, is, very quiet, but I believe there are a number of users
out there.
I'm not sure on the numbers or the details. It would be a shame to
alienate them.
Whatever we do let's try to make sure they understand what is happening.

As for moving the code under the Corinthia banner (I am a committer on
Corinthia - not on ODF toolkit) whilst I think they have common ground
they are quite different beasts.
And, as Jan pointed out, based on different language technologies.

I don't know how to inject life into it. I have raised the issue a few
time with little or no response.
There are some technical things I can see that would be good to do and
a list of JIRA items to be addressed.
But we need people on board to address them.

Before moving it to the attic is there anything that can be done to
publicise the need for people and try to attract them?
I would love to see it continue.


On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:17 PM, jan i  wrote:
> On 2 September 2015 at 17:11, Louis Suárez-Potts  wrote:
>
>>
>> > On 02 Sep 15, at 10:28, toki  wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 02/09/15 10:25, John D. Ament wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
>> >
>> > This project has been torn between going to the attic, or becoming a
>> > sub-project of another project, since at least January 2014.
>> >
>> > IMNSHO, it should go to the attic, with Apache Corinthia picking up
>> > whatever code ODF Toolkit created that it (Corinthia) can use.
>>
>> I’d agree. Far as I can tell, the only substantial difference for ODF
>> Toolkit would be that no one would have to not write non-reports nor would
>> anyone have to agonise over what has not been done.
>>
>> Plus, Corinthia could benefit by attracting more interest among those
>> interested in ODF.
>>
> As far as I can see ODF Toolkit is written in Java, so it is not that easy
> to use the code.
>
> The philosophy of ODF Toolkit also seems quite different than the
> filters/lenses of Corinthia.
>
> But of course corinthia need all the positive attention it can get.
>
> rgds
> jan i
>
>>
>> -louis
>> >
>> > jonathon
>> >
>> > -
>> > 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

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Louis Suárez-Potts]

> On 02 Sep 15, at 21:51, Ian C  wrote:
> 
> Before moving it to the attic is there anything that can be done to
> publicise the need for people and try to attract them?
> I would love to see it continue.

The philosophical issues—differences, they’re pretty deep—as well as the 
technological preferences, make stitching ODF Toolkit onto Corinthia a problem. 
One could also suggest adding it to AOO. In fact, that’d be a more logical fit.

As to reviving the actual podling. There is the upcoming ODF Plugfest. 
Attendees, participants include stakeholders in ODF, at least those with travel 
grants.

louis
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

RE: ODF Toolkit may need help

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Ian,

I recall prospects for some cooperation with POI back when the ODF Toolkit came 
over for incubation.  POI is also Java based and deals with Zip-carried 
document formats and maybe some conversions, at least within the Microsoft 
Office document models.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Ian C [mailto:i...@apache.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2015 18:52
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

Hi All,

I wrote the last none mentor signed off report for the ODF Toolit.

It has been, is, very quiet, but I believe there are a number of users
out there.
I'm not sure on the numbers or the details. It would be a shame to
alienate them.
Whatever we do let's try to make sure they understand what is happening.

As for moving the code under the Corinthia banner (I am a committer on
Corinthia - not on ODF toolkit) whilst I think they have common ground
they are quite different beasts.
And, as Jan pointed out, based on different language technologies.

I don't know how to inject life into it. I have raised the issue a few
time with little or no response.
There are some technical things I can see that would be good to do and
a list of JIRA items to be addressed.
But we need people on board to address them.

Before moving it to the attic is there anything that can be done to
publicise the need for people and try to attract them?
I would love to see it continue.


On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:17 PM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2 September 2015 at 17:11, Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On 02 Sep 15, at 10:28, toki <toki.kant...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 02/09/15 10:25, John D. Ament wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.
>> >
>> > This project has been torn between going to the attic, or becoming a
>> > sub-project of another project, since at least January 2014.
>> >
>> > IMNSHO, it should go to the attic, with Apache Corinthia picking up
>> > whatever code ODF Toolkit created that it (Corinthia) can use.
>>
>> I’d agree. Far as I can tell, the only substantial difference for ODF
>> Toolkit would be that no one would have to not write non-reports nor would
>> anyone have to agonise over what has not been done.
>>
>> Plus, Corinthia could benefit by attracting more interest among those
>> interested in ODF.
>>
> As far as I can see ODF Toolkit is written in Java, so it is not that easy
> to use the code.
>
> The philosophy of ODF Toolkit also seems quite different than the
> filters/lenses of Corinthia.
>
> But of course corinthia need all the positive attention it can get.
>
> rgds
> jan i
>
>>
>> -louis
>> >
>> > jonathon
>> >
>> > -
>> > 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


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[toki]

On 03/09/15 01:51, Ian C wrote:

> I'm not sure on the numbers or the details. It would be a shame to alienate 
> them.

The earliest mention of going to the attic on the ODF-Toolkit Users list
was on 21 January 2014.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-odf-users/201401.mbox/%3ccap-ksoj3yl_-qw_vcucm7uexduz0-_vg24muvhx7qrbqxm6...@mail.gmail.com%3E

On the ODF-Toolkit developer list, the earliest discussion about the
future of the project I can find, started with the message at
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-odf-dev/201312.mbox/%3CCAP-ksoh3FMYrVis7bHSVKOtH0=j8k7a32zxww-nuutvjcf9...@mail.gmail.com%3E.

Consequently, I doubt that going to attic will alienate anybody.
Some projects don't make it to graduation. (How positive this is,
depends upon both the percentage of projects that go to attic, rather
than graduation, as well as an analysis of all projects that went from
incubation to attic. If more than a third of the projects go to attic,
and are _not_ "me too" projects, then, overall, the Apache Software
Foundation is healthy.  If less than 5% of the projects go to attic, and
are _not_ "me too" projects, then ASF is stagnant, unhealthy, and
failing in its mission.)

jonathon

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ODF Toolkit may need help

[toki]

On 02/09/15 10:25, John D. Ament wrote:

> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling.

This project has been torn between going to the attic, or becoming a
sub-project of another project, since at least January 2014.

IMNSHO, it should go to the attic, with Apache Corinthia picking up
whatever code ODF Toolkit created that it (Corinthia) can use.

jonathon

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org