[discuss] Graduate Continuum to its own TLP

[Emmanuel Venisse]

Hi,

At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it isn't centered on maven projects.

An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users) with actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can get more with a TLP project.

My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella code and not only one project.

So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.

My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different companies would be good.

WDYT?

Emmanuel

[rahul.thakur.xdev]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Emmanuel Venisse" <emmanuel@...>
To: <continuum-dev@...>
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 3:57 AM
Subject: [discuss] Graduate Continuum to its own TLP

> Hi,
>
> At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> isn't centered on maven projects.
>
> An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users)
> with actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can
> get more with a TLP project.
>
> My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella
> code and not only one project.
>
> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to
> grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
> different companies would be good.

While I am for Continuum as TLP, I don't understand the
rationale behind having committers from different companies. How would
this help to make Continuum more stable?

Cheers,

Rahul

>
> WDYT?
>
> Emmanuel
>

[jmcconnell]

I agree, I think continuum would make a good TLP and move out from the
direct maven umbrella.  We can attract committers that might not be totally
driven with the maven2 koolaid if we are not strictly associated with that
project.

I know there are a lot of plans for continuum in the relatively near future
and I think its an ideal time to take continuum up as a TLP.

As for more committers, I think they will come with time and some of the
work that is planned.  Emm and I work for the same company but olamy is
really active and new committer, and Rahul will probably be stepping up some
more as we start working on some of the refactoring bits that have been
discussed some (and he gets that whole marriage deal worked out).

Anyway, I support this and it has been kicked around in the background for a
while now.

jesse

On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> isn't centered on maven projects.
>
> An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users) with
> actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can get more with
> a TLP project.
>
> My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella code
> and not only one project.
>
> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project at
> ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from different
> companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different companies
> would be good.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Emmanuel
>
>

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@...

[olamy]

Hi,
+1.
It will help to find more committers to implement all great new features.

--
Olivier

2007/9/21, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...>:

>
> Hi,
>
> At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> isn't centered on maven projects.
>
> An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users) with
> actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can get more with
> a TLP project.
>
> My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella code
> and not only one project.
>
> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project at
> ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from different
> companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different companies
> would be good.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Emmanuel
>
>

--
Olivier

[brettporter]

On 22/09/2007, at 7:34 AM, Rahul Thakur wrote:

>> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
>> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to
>> grow.

I agree. It is effectively running itself already.

>>
>> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
>> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
>> different companies would be good.
>
> While I am for Continuum as TLP, I don't understand the
> rationale behind having committers from different companies. How would
> this help to make Continuum more stable?
>

Stability from a community point of view. Firstly, we need to ensure  
we have enough committers in the first place - for example, to ensure  
that if Emmanuel decided he could no longer participate, the project  
would need to be able to survive (though obviously, miss him greatly :)

Having those committers from a diverse set of companies is an extra  
safeguard to ensure that no single company either controls the  
direction of the project, or could cause it problems by withdrawing  
people's time on it. To be clear, there's no reason to suspect this  
is a problem now - it's just a worthy thing to have in a project.

I think everything is on track here - the first focus should be on  
getting 1.1 out of course, but if we keep doing what we are doing  
this totally makes sense.

Cheers,
Brett

--
Brett Porter - brett@...
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/

[Christian Edward Gruber]

+1

Christian

On 21-Sep-07, at 8:10 PM, Brett Porter wrote:

>
> On 22/09/2007, at 7:34 AM, Rahul Thakur wrote:
>
>>> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
>>> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to
>>> grow.
>
> I agree. It is effectively running itself already.
>
>>>
>>> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
>>> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
>>> different companies would be good.
>>
>> While I am for Continuum as TLP, I don't understand the
>> rationale behind having committers from different companies. How  
>> would
>> this help to make Continuum more stable?
>>
>
> Stability from a community point of view. Firstly, we need to ensure  
> we have enough committers in the first place - for example, to  
> ensure that if Emmanuel decided he could no longer participate, the  
> project would need to be able to survive (though obviously, miss him  
> greatly :)
>
> Having those committers from a diverse set of companies is an extra  
> safeguard to ensure that no single company either controls the  
> direction of the project, or could cause it problems by withdrawing  
> people's time on it. To be clear, there's no reason to suspect this  
> is a problem now - it's just a worthy thing to have in a project.
>
> I think everything is on track here - the first focus should be on  
> getting 1.1 out of course, but if we keep doing what we are doing  
> this totally makes sense.
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter - brett@...
> Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
>

[Trygve Laugstøl-5]

Emmanuel Venisse wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> isn't centered on maven projects.
>
> An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users) with
> actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can get more
> with a TLP project.
>
> My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella
> code and not only one project.
>
> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project
> at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different
> companies would be good.
>
> WDYT?

I think Continuum fits both under the Maven umbrella and and a separate
TLP on Apache and I would support both outcomes.

--
Trygve

[Wendy Smoak-3]

On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:

> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different companies would be good.

It definitely feels like it's time for this to happen, or at least to
start the process.  Assuming there is general agreement here, let's
talk about it on dev@maven and see who else might be interested in
joining us in a TLP.

IMO, anyone who has access to the code now as part of Maven is welcome
to come along when it moves out, or at any point in the future.
That's how we handled the Tiles move (from Struts) and it worked well.

--
Wendy

[Maria Odea Ching-2]

+1 on this..

I think Continuum is ready to become a TLP at ASF.

-Deng

Emmanuel Venisse wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> isn't centered on maven projects.
>
> An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users)
> with actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can
> get more with a TLP project.
>
> My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella
> code and not only one project.
>
> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
> different companies would be good.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Emmanuel
>
>

[Mauro Talevi]

Emmanuel Venisse wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> isn't centered on maven projects.
>
> An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users) with
> actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can get more
> with a TLP project.
>
> My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella
> code and not only one project.
>
> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project
> at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
>
> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different
> companies would be good.
>
> WDYT?
>

+1 for move to TLP, but the project needs to shift its emphasis from maven.

Currently the Jira description still states:
"Continuum is a continuous integration tool designed specifically for use with maven project."

It would also be good to have a comparison page with other open-source build tools - eg CruiseControl.

Cheers

[Tomasz Pik]

On 9/29/07, Mauro Talevi <mauro.talevi@...> wrote:

> It would also be good to have a comparison page with other open-source build tools - eg CruiseControl.

there's such a comparision here:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/DAMAGECONTROL/Continuous+Integration+Server+Feature+Matrix
However I do not know, if it's actually maintained and  up to date for projects
listed there.

Regards,
Tomek

[jmcconnell]

I actually would prefer to have an increased focus on maven and maven2
integration.  tbh there are many different continuous integration servers
and the ties with maven could be increased some more and leverage some
really nice features in maven.

I don't really think continuum needs to really try and compete in the shell
script launched builds and tying ourselves to these kinda ideas limits the
fun things that can be done.

with increased maven integration we could integrate build and reporting
tools automatically into the builds, just injecting these kinda reports into
maven2 projects that are under CI.  lots of things possible but increasing
the maven2 support

just my thoughts :)

jesse

On 9/29/07, Mauro Talevi <mauro.talevi@...> wrote:

>
> Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > At the begin, Continuum was designed to support maven2 projects so we
> > thought it was good to put it under the maven umbrella.
> > But now it supports other project types (ANT, shell scripts) too so it
> > isn't centered on maven projects.
> >
> > An other thing is that we have lot of users (not only maven users) with
> > actually 450 subscribers to the users list, and I think we can get more
> > with a TLP project.
> >
> > My last point is that with the maven project, it isn't easy to add new
> > committers because a new committer have the hand on all maven umbrella
> > code and not only one project.
> >
> > So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level Project
> > at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to grow.
> >
> > My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> > different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from different
> > companies would be good.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
>
> +1 for move to TLP, but the project needs to shift its emphasis from
> maven.
>
> Currently the Jira description still states:
> "Continuum is a continuous integration tool designed specifically for use
> with maven project."
>
> It would also be good to have a comparison page with other open-source
> build tools - eg CruiseControl.
>
> Cheers
>
>

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@...

[Mauro Talevi]

Jesse McConnell wrote:

> I actually would prefer to have an increased focus on maven and maven2
> integration.  tbh there are many different continuous integration servers
> and the ties with maven could be increased some more and leverage some
> really nice features in maven.
>
> I don't really think continuum needs to really try and compete in the shell
> script launched builds and tying ourselves to these kinda ideas limits the
> fun things that can be done.
>
> with increased maven integration we could integrate build and reporting
> tools automatically into the builds, just injecting these kinda reports into
> maven2 projects that are under CI.  lots of things possible but increasing
> the maven2 support
>
> just my thoughts :)
>

I'm not saying it should not have strong support and integration with m2.

Just that it if Continuum wants to graduate from under the wings of maven umbrella, it should also
address the concerns of other build systems.  As much as possible try to offer the same feature set
to all build tools, but also offer extra functionality leveraging on m2 features where it can.

Cheers

[brettporter]

So, what's next?

This seems generally in favour - now might be a good time to get  
started on it?

 From past experience the steps would be:
- poll the current maven committers to see who is interested in  
participating in the TLP
- draft a resolution with those committers as the initial PMC
- vote on sending the resolution to the board

The board next meets in mid-January.

Any thoughts on moving forward with this?

- Brett

On 24/09/2007, at 6:59 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:

> On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:
>
>> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level  
>> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to  
>> grow.
>>
>> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from  
>> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from  
>> different companies would be good.
>
> It definitely feels like it's time for this to happen, or at least to
> start the process.  Assuming there is general agreement here, let's
> talk about it on dev@maven and see who else might be interested in
> joining us in a TLP.
>
> IMO, anyone who has access to the code now as part of Maven is welcome
> to come along when it moves out, or at any point in the future.
> That's how we handled the Tiles move (from Struts) and it worked well.
>
> --
> Wendy

[olamy]

Hi,
Agree to start processing this.

If I can help I will.

--
Olivier

2007/12/20, Brett Porter <brett@...>:

> So, what's next?
>
> This seems generally in favour - now might be a good time to get
> started on it?
>
>  From past experience the steps would be:
> - poll the current maven committers to see who is interested in
> participating in the TLP
> - draft a resolution with those committers as the initial PMC
> - vote on sending the resolution to the board
>
> The board next meets in mid-January.
>
> Any thoughts on moving forward with this?
>
> - Brett
>
> On 24/09/2007, at 6:59 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
>
> > On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:
> >
> >> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
> >> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to
> >> grow.
> >>
> >> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> >> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
> >> different companies would be good.
> >
> > It definitely feels like it's time for this to happen, or at least to
> > start the process.  Assuming there is general agreement here, let's
> > talk about it on dev@maven and see who else might be interested in
> > joining us in a TLP.
> >
> > IMO, anyone who has access to the code now as part of Maven is welcome
> > to come along when it moves out, or at any point in the future.
> > That's how we handled the Tiles move (from Struts) and it worked well.
> >
> > --
> > Wendy
>
>

[Emmanuel Venisse]

I'm ok too, but I don't have the time to work on it.

Emmanuel

Olivier Lamy a écrit :

> Hi,
> Agree to start processing this.
>
> If I can help I will.
>
> --
> Olivier
>
> 2007/12/20, Brett Porter <brett@...>:
>> So, what's next?
>>
>> This seems generally in favour - now might be a good time to get
>> started on it?
>>
>>  From past experience the steps would be:
>> - poll the current maven committers to see who is interested in
>> participating in the TLP
>> - draft a resolution with those committers as the initial PMC
>> - vote on sending the resolution to the board
>>
>> The board next meets in mid-January.
>>
>> Any thoughts on moving forward with this?
>>
>> - Brett
>>
>> On 24/09/2007, at 6:59 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
>>>> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to
>>>> grow.
>>>>
>>>> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
>>>> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
>>>> different companies would be good.
>>> It definitely feels like it's time for this to happen, or at least to
>>> start the process.  Assuming there is general agreement here, let's
>>> talk about it on dev@maven and see who else might be interested in
>>> joining us in a TLP.
>>>
>>> IMO, anyone who has access to the code now as part of Maven is welcome
>>> to come along when it moves out, or at any point in the future.
>>> That's how we handled the Tiles move (from Struts) and it worked well.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Wendy
>>
>
>

[jmcconnell]

+1 I still think this is a great idea...

On Dec 22, 2007 6:34 AM, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:

> I'm ok too, but I don't have the time to work on it.
>
> Emmanuel
>
> Olivier Lamy a écrit :
> > Hi,
> > Agree to start processing this.
> >
> > If I can help I will.
> >
> > --
> > Olivier
> >
> > 2007/12/20, Brett Porter <brett@...>:
> >> So, what's next?
> >>
> >> This seems generally in favour - now might be a good time to get
> >> started on it?
> >>
> >>  From past experience the steps would be:
> >> - poll the current maven committers to see who is interested in
> >> participating in the TLP
> >> - draft a resolution with those committers as the initial PMC
> >> - vote on sending the resolution to the board
> >>
> >> The board next meets in mid-January.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts on moving forward with this?
> >>
> >> - Brett
> >>
> >> On 24/09/2007, at 6:59 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@...> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
> >>>> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance to
> >>>> grow.
> >>>>
> >>>> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> >>>> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
> >>>> different companies would be good.
> >>> It definitely feels like it's time for this to happen, or at least to
> >>> start the process.  Assuming there is general agreement here, let's
> >>> talk about it on dev@maven and see who else might be interested in
> >>> joining us in a TLP.
> >>>
> >>> IMO, anyone who has access to the code now as part of Maven is welcome
> >>> to come along when it moves out, or at any point in the future.
> >>> That's how we handled the Tiles move (from Struts) and it worked well.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Wendy
> >>
> >
> >
>

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@...

[brettporter]

So the poll for progressing seems in favour.

Before we continue to vote on a proposal to send to the board, we need  
to decide on a description for the project, the initial PMC/
committers, and a chair.

I would like to nominate Emmanuel as the chair of the project. Are  
there any other nominations?

I have the current committers list as:
Maria Odea Ching
Joakim Erdfelt
Olivier Lamy
Trygve Laugstol
Jesse McConnell
Brett Porter
Edwin Punzalan
Carlos Sanchez
Wendy Smoak
Rahul Thakur
Emmanuel Venisse
Kenney Westerhof
Andrew Williams

Anyone on that list that doesn't feel they should be a committer? Did  
I miss anyone?

The following have committed only once, or have declared themselves  
emeritus:
Herve Boutemy
Dan Diephouse
Fabrizio Giustina
Arnaud Heritier
Lukas Theussl
Jason van Zyl

Anyone on that list that would like to be included?

Finally - I propose that the initial PMC be equal to the list of  
committers. Any objections or opinions about that?

Cheers,
Brett

On 20/12/2007, at 5:42 PM, Brett Porter wrote:

> So, what's next?
>
> This seems generally in favour - now might be a good time to get  
> started on it?
>
> From past experience the steps would be:
> - poll the current maven committers to see who is interested in  
> participating in the TLP
> - draft a resolution with those committers as the initial PMC
>