On Sat, 21 Jul 2018, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:17:03 +0200
From: Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr>
To: general@attic.apache.org
Subject: Re: no projects in the Attic
Hi,
I like that there is no project in the Attic: there is only static codebases
(and other types of assets like mailing lists or sites), with nobody to make
them evolve, then no project (project means evolution)
I like 'project x is in the attic' (but I won't be stubborn :-).
I like the idea of 'project' as a (separate) object that
-- is created by Incubator ; may die in Incubator
-- can move from PMC to PMC ;
graduation : project -> move ( Incubator, Parent )
retirement : project -> move ( Parent, Attic )
reviving : project -> move ( Attic, Parent )
-- board ok's the moves
A Project has more attributes than (pointer to) 'codebase' ;
like name, description, website, logo, trademark, MavenId (?) etc.
Even "in the attic", a project has more 'presence' than
just 'codebase'.
In fact, an Attic project is just a project without a 'community'.
[ Why do you say "project means evolution" ?
; That is what everybody seems to think :-),
but I don't get it ; hence, I won't stubborn
; Can you please explain that for me ?
]
IMHO, recreating frozen projects is not a good idea
it's a question of wording to better represent the semantic behind Attic:
project = codebase + community to make it evolve and a PMC to manage the
evolution
we should perhaps rephrase: a project is not Attic'ed, but a former project's
codebase (+ site + mailing lists) is Attic'ed because community disappeared
-- I think 'project X' is always the same thing ;
some of it's attributes my change from time to time.
-- PMCs Incubator and Attic are like other PMCs,
except that they have special rules for managing projects.
-- Remember the 'Project' versus 'Product' discussion ?
A 'Product' is just the public facing side of a 'Project' ;
same object, different presentation.
-- When the board kills a product, it is taken of the shelves,
but it is/was still a 'product' ('not available, at the moment').
I think the above is a clean, clear design ; easy to explain,
easy to document, and easy to implement (put in a database).
For a fresh look, please read the above again ;
read 'product' where it says 'project' :-).
Hervé
Groeten,
HPP
------------------------------------------------------------ _
Henk P. Penning, ICT-beta R Uithof MG-403 _/ \_
Faculty of Science, Utrecht University T +31 30 253 4106 / \_/ \
Leuvenlaan 4, 3584CE Utrecht, NL F +31 30 253 4553 \_/ \_/
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~penni101/ M penn...@uu.nl \_/
Le vendredi 20 juillet 2018, 09:45:47 CEST Henk P. Penning a écrit :
Hi Attic,
FYI ; for the record.
Last wednesday I attended the Board meeting ;
this is recommended for new chairs ; also,
the board would discuss Attic's last report.
To my surprise I've learned that formally
there are no "projects in the Attic".
The reason is that the board resolution that terminates
a PMC, also terminates the Project. Because the project
does not (formally) exist, it can't be in the Attic ;
so, there are no projects in the Attic.
This (formal) worldview is at variance with our charter,
and it is not how we work, or what we present to the world.
So, I took the liberty to ask the board to
-- pass a resolution (see below, lines marked with '*')
which (formally) re-establishes 'our' projects again,
-- in the future, move projects into the Attic,
instead of terminating them
so we can keep on working as we have upto now.
I hope the board will accept this ; it would erase
the difference between the 'formal' worldview,
and what we do and present to the world.
Regards,
Henk Penning
PS : I hope I didn't violate accepted procedure ;
If not, I hope this post will correct that.
------------------------------------------------------------ _
Henk P. Penning, ICT-beta R Uithof MG-403 _/ \_
Faculty of Science, Utrecht University T +31 30 253 4106 / \_/ \
Leuvenlaan 4, 3584CE Utrecht, NL F +31 30 253 4553 \_/ \_/
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~penni101/ M penn...@uu.nl \_/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 21:11:03 +0200
From: Henk P. Penning <penn...@uu.nl>
To: Apache Board <bo...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: XMLBeans => POI and decision making
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:05:54 +0200
From: Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com>
To: Apache Board <bo...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: XMLBeans => POI and decision making
As the canonical sources of truth, board resolutions are pretty high
on the list. If a board resolution, which was voted on and passed by
the board, says that a project was terminated, well, it was terminated.
Great ; that's clear.
The (formal) 'truth' is that, at the moment, PMC Attic
is tasked with "oversight over the software developed
by the Apache XMLBeans Project" [Board minutes 17 Jul 2013]
https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/XMLBeans.html
I think I must ask the board to pass a resolution effectively
relieving PMC Attic of this task, because the XMLbeans
codebase is now managed by PCM Poi.
For convenience referring to Apache Foo as being moved to
the Attic or lumping (ex) projects under Apache Attic is simply
that... convenience. It is much easier to say "Apache Foo is
now in the Attic" (colloquial) than "The Apache Foo project no
longer exists but the codebase which comprised the project
is now under the official oversight of the Apache Attic and the
software can be found there".
* The discrepancy 'truth' vs 'colloquial' is ... inconvenient,
* and confusing for many people. It can me remedied easily.
* I propose that the board passes a resolution which
* -- establishes (retired) projects :
* -- "Apache Abdera Project"
* -- "Apache ACE Project"
* -- "Apache Avalon Project"
* -- ...
* -- "Apache XML Project"
* -- tasks PMC "Apache Attic Project" with the oversight the projects
* -- pursuant to bylaws of the Foundation
* In the future, the board 'termination' resolution should
* -- terminate the PMC XXX [as is usual]
* -- terminate the office of "VP, Apache XXX" [as is usual]
* -- task PMC Attic with the oversight of Project XXX
* Note that this :
* ... merely sanctions current, established, accepted practice
* ... cleans up the process, a little
* ... hopefully avoids some endless, confused discussions in the future
Thanks ; regards,
Henk Penning
------------------------------------------------------------ _
Henk P. Penning, ICT-beta R Uithof MG-403 _/ \_
Faculty of Science, Utrecht University T +31 30 253 4106 / \_/ \
Leuvenlaan 4, 3584CE Utrecht, NL F +31 30 253 4553 \_/ \_/
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~penni101/ M penn...@uu.nl \_/
As for the POI stuff, well, IMHO POI lacks the ability and
power and authority to "unretire" XMLBeans: XMLBeans was
not "retired". It was terminated
(https://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2013/board_minutes_201
3_07_17.txt). That was an action by the board. A PMC can not reverse nor
overturn that on its own. Also, the binding of a project and a PMC is
also
something that the bylaws clearly state (Section 6.3)[1] is something
that must be done by the board and via a resolution.
1: "Each Project Management Committee shall be responsible for the
active management of one or more projects identified by resolution
of the Board of Directors"
