Hey there, I meant to remove the issues section at top and replace with the one in the community health section but forgot to remove the top part. I just submitted with the removed top part. Let me know if people want me to further edit.
Thanks On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 1:54 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > It's good with me. > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le 10/10/2019 à 22:51, Jacques Nadeau a écrit : > > Antoine, is my synopsis fair? > > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:53 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 2:12 PM Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >>> Proposed report update below. LMK your thoughts. > >>> > >>> ## Description: > >>> The mission of Apache Arrow is the creation and maintenance of software > >>> related to columnar in-memory processing and data interchange > >>> > >>> ## Issues: > >>> > >>> * We are struggling with Continuous Integration scalability as the > >> project > >>> has > >>> definitely outgrown what Travis CI and Appveyor can do for us. Some > >>> contributors have shown reluctance to submit patches they aren't sure > >>> about > >>> because they don't want to pile on the build queue. We are exploring > >>> alternative solutions such as Buildbot, Buildkite, and GitHub Actions > >> to > >>> provide a path to migrate away from Travis CI / Appveyor. In our > >> request > >>> to > >>> Infrastructure INFRA-19217, some of us were alarmed to find that an > >> CI/CD > >>> service like Buildkite may not be able to be connected to the @apache > >>> GitHub > >>> account on account of requiring admin access to repository webhooks, > >> but > >>> no > >>> ability to modify source code. There are workarounds (building custom > >>> OAuth > >>> bots) that could enable us to use Buildkite, but it would require > extra > >>> development and result in a less refined experience for community > >>> members. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ## Membership Data: > >>> * Apache Arrow was founded 2016-01-19 (4 years ago) > >>> * There are currently 48 committers and 28 PMC members in this project. > >>> * The Committer-to-PMC ratio is roughly 3:2. > >>> > >>> Community changes, past quarter: > >>> - Micah Kornfield was added to the PMC on 2019-08-21 > >>> - Sebastien Binet was added to the PMC on 2019-08-21 > >>> - Ben Kietzman was added as committer on 2019-09-07 > >>> - David Li was added as committer on 2019-08-30 > >>> - Kenta Murata was added as committer on 2019-09-05 > >>> - Neal Richardson was added as committer on 2019-09-05 > >>> - Praveen Kumar was added as committer on 2019-07-14 > >>> > >>> ## Project Activity: > >>> > >>> * The project has just made a 0.15.0 release. > >>> * We are discussing ways to make the Arrow libraries as accessible as > >>> possible > >>> to downstream projects for minimal use cases while allowing the > >>> development > >>> of more comprehensive "standard libraries" with larger dependency > >> stacks > >>> in > >>> the project > >>> * We plan to make a 1.0.0 release as our next major release, at which > >> time > >>> we > >>> will declare that the Arrow binary protocol is stable with forward > and > >>> backward compatibility guarantees > >>> > >>> ## Community Health: > >>> > >>> * The community is continuing to grow at a great rate. We see good > >> adoption > >>> among many other projects and fast growth of key metrics. > >>> * Many contributors are struggling with the slowness of pre-commit CI. > >>> Arrow > >>> has a large number of different platforms and components and a > complex > >>> build > >>> matrix. As new commits come in, they frequently take a long time to > >>> complete. The community is trying several ways to solve this. There > is > >>> bubbling frustration in the community around the GitHub repo rules > for > >>> using > >>> third party services. This is especially challenging when there are > >> free > >>> solutions to relieve the community pressure but the community is > unable > >>> to > >>> access these resources. This frustration is greatest among people who > >>> work > >>> on many non-asf OSS projects which don't have such restrictive rules > >>> around GitHub. Some examples of ways the community has tried to > >> resolve > >>> these have included: > >>> * Try to use CircleCI, rejected in INFRA-15964 > >>> * Try to use Azure Pipelines, rejected in INFRA-17030 > >>> * Try to resolves Issues with Travis CI capacity: INFRA-18533 & > >>> https://s.apache.org/ci-capacity (no resolution beyond "find > >>> donations") > >>> * The creation of new infrastructure design (in progress but a huge > >>> amount of > >>> thankless work) > >>> * While the community has seen great growth in contribution (more than > >> 300 > >>> unique contributors at this point), the vast majority are casual > >>> contributors. The daily active committers (the workhorses of the > >> project > >>> that bear the load committing the constant PRs, more than 5000 closed > >> at > >>> this point) have been growing slower than adoption. This is despite > the > >>> fact > >>> that the community has been very aggressive at being inclusive of new > >>> committers (with likelihood to have more than 50 in the next week). > The > >>> community is still continuing to try to brainstorm ways to improve > >> this. > >>> > >> > > >
