Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo, mail # dev - Code import for Apache Accumulo


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Code import for Apache Accumulo
Benson Margulies 2013-11-09, 15:00
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Eric Whyne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josh,
> That looks like a great plan.  I agree with your thoughts on incubation and
> governance and have no concerns with your suggested path.

One footnote. The board has, in the past, approved 'meiosis' of TLP's.
Imagine that you accept the code as a contribution, and some of the
people involved are eventually voted onto the PMC here. If there is a
large enough, experienced enough, group that wishes to split off down
the line, they might not have to go through the incubator. I really
don't recommend _planning on that_, I suspect that such a plan would
receive unfavorable reviews. I think it's fine to accept their
contribution, let them come up to speed as committers and PMC members,
and just know that there are various options down the line.

>
> R/
> Eric
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> (removing general@incubator because we don't need to keep spamming them
>> right now)
>>
>> First, I talked to Benson who cleared up some confusion that I had.
>>
>> "The question is the governance. If you're willing to adopt these people
>> as part of your community, you can do that. If your community chooses to
>> organize its code in two git repos, you can do that.  What you can't do is
>> create an umbrella in which they are a separate self-governing thing inside
>> your community. The accumulo PMC can even grant them commit to a new repo,
>> I think, in the same way that various communities grant commit access to
>> svn branches as part of their process of joining up with you."
>>
>> In short, we can bring in raccumulo to Accumulo under our "governance". If
>> at some point raccumulo grows into its own community and wants to have its
>> own governance, it would have to go through incubator.
>>
>> To me, it seems like incubator at this point would be premature (as
>> raccumulo is very tied to Accumulo and all interested parties so far are
>> from one company); however, I'm not one to tell you that you can't go
>> through incubation on your own.
>>
>> As such, the best thing seems to me to bring in raccumulo under Accumulo
>> governance. To make this actually happen, the Accumulo PMC need to have a
>> vote as to whether or not we should do this.
>>
>> PMC -- is there more discussion that wants to be had before moving to a
>> vote on the matter?
>>
>> Eric + others -- any concerns with the path I've suggested?
>>
>>
>> On 11/4/13, 9:37 PM, Eric Whyne wrote:
>>
>>> If we eventually get the code hosted on
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf it should be no problem to
>>> propagate updates to or from the github page, depending on how things
>>> worked out. This model seemed to make sense at the time. I had noticed
>>> that
>>> the accumulo core was doing the same thing. This also had the added
>>> benefit
>>> of having a place where the code could be subject to public scrutiny and
>>> version controlled as we got it to an acceptable state. I noticed some
>>> notes in the apache documents about coding standards and there was the
>>> whole licensing concern etc... There has already been some modification of
>>> the code since Aaron uploaded the .tgz  here
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1804 Restructuring and
>>> adding documentation.
>>>
>>> Sub-project is identified as an incubation graduation status. I think in
>>> accumulo project vocabulary sub-projects are contrib projects? Am I right
>>> to think this?
>>>
>>> I think you had offered to help kick off incubation. Is that the right
>>> path
>>> to a contrib project or is there a different way to get there from here?
>>>
>>> R/
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/4/13, 8:45 PM, Eric Whyne wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  I just scanned through the ip-clearance page and came away a bit
>>>>> confused
>>>>> after reading this sentence.
>>>>> "*This form is not for new projects.* This is for projects and PMCs that