I personally think it is important to have a person working consistently on the ACS releases. It is a ton of work and with the job rotating right now, it makes it harder for everyone. That said, no organization can afford to hire a dedicated RM for year(s) at a time. I have considered it, but even if I did, I would depend on other organizations to contribute towards that person's salary to be able to actually make it work.
On Jun 30, 2017 9:33 AM, "Alex Hitchins" <a...@alexhitchins.com> wrote: > I'll read those links, thank you for providing them. > > Do you think this is a move in the wrong direction or just an unnecessary > move to begin with? > > Alexander Hitchins > ------------------------ > E: a...@alexhitchins.com > W: alexhitchins.com > M: 07788 423 969 > T: 01892 523 587 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ron Wheeler [mailto:rwhee...@artifact-software.com] > Sent: 30 June 2017 14:06 > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html says: > "If you have a specific target or project that you wish to directly > support, pleasecontact us <https://www.apache.org/ > foundation/contributing.html#Fundraising>and we will do our best to > satisfy your wishes." > > 1) Is Apache willing to allow projects to set up their own foundations? > I doubt but someone would need to check this out. > Does the PMC have the project charter or the agreement that was signed > when Cloudstack moved. > > 2) Has anyone tried to contact Apache about directing support to > Cloudstack. > > I am not convinced that lack of paid staff is the issue. > This discussion reminded me of this. > Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb ? > A: Only one, but the lightbulb must want to change > > http://www.lightbulbjokes.com/directory/p.html > > > Ron > > > On 30/06/2017 6:48 AM, Alex Hitchins wrote: > > As per Giles's comment to the previous thread, I thought I would start a > discussion on the subject to canvas peoples thoughts, opinions and fears. > > > > My question for discussion, is there is any mileage in someone creating > a "CloudStack Foundation" as a non-profit entity, funded largely by key > CloudStack players with the sole function of employing dedicated resource > (part or full time) to handle all releases and other essential 'back > office' functions. The idea being it's in everyone's interest to chip in a > little each to fund core project and release management. > > > > The idea might be utterly irrelevant, pointless and/or straight up daft. > I urge you all to let me know. > > > > Something for you all to think over this weekend. > > > > > > Alexander Hitchins > > ------------------------ > > E: a...@alexhitchins.com > > W: alexhitchins.com > > M: 07788 423 969 > > T: 01892 523 587 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Giles Sirett [mailto:giles.sir...@shapeblue.com] > > Sent: 30 June 2017 09:51 > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: RE: JIRA - PLEASE READ > > > > All > > This thread seems to have turned into 2 quite different discussions: > > > > 1. The use (or not) of Jira - which was the original discussion > > > > 2. Ways/means of encouraging (and paying for more structured > > contributors) > > > > I know that it could be argued that these are related. Could I suggest > > opening up a thread on "release and project management and funding it" > > and keeping this thread to the original discussion > > > > (I will weigh in on both of these at some stage) > > > > Kind regards > > Giles > > > > giles.sir...@shapeblue.com > > www.shapeblue.com > > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex Hitchins [mailto:a...@alexhitchins.com] > > Sent: 29 June 2017 18:49 > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: Re: JIRA - PLEASE READ > > > > If it isn't being treated as a product it will be very impossible to > market it as enterprise ready. > > > > I know we all know this. > > > > Similar sized projects under the Apache banner must have the same issue, > what is the best way to gather experience of these projects? See how they > handle these growing pains. > > > > A cloudstack foundation entity funded by companies earning from > cloudstack seems a good way forward. > > > > Another tuppence, this is getting expensive. > > > > > > > >> On 29 Jun 2017, at 18:18, Ron Wheeler <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> > wrote: > >> > >> I understand that it is a volunteer organization. > >> I do not know how many (if any) of the committers and PMC members are > funded by their organizations (allowed or ordered to work on Cloudstack > during company time) which is often the way that Apache projects get > staffed. > >> > >> Clearly it is hard to tell someone who is being funded by a company to > fix a problem or who is working on their own time, to do or not do > something. > >> > >> On the other hand, the PMC has to build a community culture that is > good for the project. > >> That means describing a vision, planning and enforcing a roadmap, and > maintaining a focused project "marketing" effort. > >> > >> There is a lot of extremely talented individuals working on Cloudstack > and it appears to have a very strong and valuable code-base. > >> > >> To me the key question is about the PMC and the core committers' > ability to make Cloudstack a "product" that can compete for market share > and acceptance. > >> > >> Is Cloudstack at a point in its development where it should be treated > like a product? > >> - sufficient functionality to compete > >> - sufficient user base to be a competitor in the market > >> - production reliability and stability > >> - business model for supporting companies to justify their continued > >> support > >> > >> This may not require more effort but requires different policies and > different activities. > >> > >> There has to be someone or a PMC that can say "No". > >> - This change can not be included in this release because it will delay > the release. > >> - This change adds an unacceptable level of complexity > >> - This bug fix will have to wait for the next release because it is too > late to test it and fix the docs. > >> - This fix breaks the docs > >> - The release can not be made until this doc is updated. > >> > >> Does the core group want to make it a competitive product or is it > sufficient for the interested players to continue in its current form? > >> > >> Ron > >> > >> > >> > >>> On 29/06/2017 9:42 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > >>> I personally don't know how Jira solves any of this, but assuming it > >>> does, fine... > >>> > >>> The bigger problem which you have raised is that CloudStack has zero > >>> funding. So we can't hire a project manager, or a release manager or > >>> someone whose job it is to maintain documentation. I have been > >>> trying to find a way to, at the very least, fund a full time release > >>> manager who can focus 100% on the project. As the release manager > >>> for 4.9, I know it is a full time job. I did my best, but it is a > >>> ton of work and is hard to stay on top of. > >>> > >>> Everyone contributing to CloudStack is donating their time. They > >>> can't make a living off supporting ACS, so every one is doing their > >>> best with the little time they can take away from their day job or > their family life. > >>> > >>> Yes, having clear guidelines and sticking to them helps, but without > >>> a solid CI infrastructure backing the project and improved testing > >>> and automation, we will always struggles with release schedules and > such. > >>> > >>> I have been involved in this project long enough to know that all > >>> the problems you point out exist, but they are also not easily solved. > >>> Obviously we have to work with the initiatives we have and take > >>> small steps towards improvement, but we also have to be realistic > >>> with our expectations because we are counting on people's generosity > to move them forward. > >>> > >>> Simplifying moving parts and streamlining the process will lead to > >>> more contribution because there is less barriers to entry. This one > >>> reason why I struggle to see the value in Jira as it is used today. > >>> I personally don't understand what value it is giving us that the > >>> github PRs and Issues don't solve. > >>> > >>> I will remain open minded and will follow along with what people > >>> think is best, but I think it is worth understanding what we are > >>> trying to solve for and simplify our approach in solving it so we > >>> can get better systems in place. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jun 29, 2017 9:17 AM, "Ron Wheeler" > >>> <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> As a real outsider, IMHO Paul is right. > >>>> > >>>> At times it seems that Cloudstack is a coding hobby rather than a > >>>> project or a production quality product. > >>>> > >>>> Who decides what goes into a release? How does this affect the > >>>> release schedule? > >>>> Who is responsible for meeting the "published" roadmap (of which > >>>> there seem to be many) of releases? > >>>> > >>>> How is a system admin that is not part of the project supposed to > >>>> plan for upgrade windows? > >>>> How does one know when a feature, bug fix or release will be > available? > >>>> > >>>> How does the PMC manage function creep in a release, maintain > >>>> quality and consistency, reject changes that hurt the overall > >>>> vision or add too much complexity? > >>>> > >>>> No one seems to care about documentation but if someone did, how > >>>> would they stop undocumented features or features that contradict > >>>> the documentation from being incorporated? > >>>> Who makes sure that the documentation is correct at the time of the > >>>> release? > >>>> Release notes are not much help for someone doing a new install or > >>>> evaluating Cloudstack. > >>>> > >>>> Without a JIRA entry, how does an end-user who encounters a problem > >>>> know that it has been fixed already in the next release? > >>>> > >>>> Without a JIRA entry, how does the community comment on a proposed > >>>> change before it gets coded? > >>>> > >>>> If changes are going to be accepted without a JIRA, is there a > >>>> definition of a minor fix that does not require a JIRA? > >>>> - does not change functionality? > >>>> - only affects an "edge case" or cleans up an exception that is not > >>>> properly handled? > >>>> - only improves code readability or future extensibility? > >>>> - does not affect documentation? > >>>> > >>>> Apache projects that are popular and enjoy wide support do have > >>>> strong management. > >>>> > >>>> There are other examples where great Apache software is failing to > >>>> get recognized because the PMC is not paying attention to the > >>>> product management side of things. > >>>> I use Apache Jackrabbit which is a quality product with a strong > >>>> technical team supporting it. > >>>> It has very little following because the documentation and > >>>> marketing collateral is very poor. > >>>> It gets by because the audience for it is largely software > >>>> developers who can read code and can test features to work out the > functionality. > >>>> It would get a lot more attention if they paid attention to the > >>>> product management side of the project. > >>>> > >>>> Cloudstack needs to avoid this situation and unfortunately this > >>>> takes effort and some discipline. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Ron > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On 29/06/2017 8:03 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Why are we still using jira instead of the PRs for that > >>>>> communication? Can we not use issues in github now instead of jira > >>>>> if someone needs to open an issue but does not yet have code to > >>>>> contribute. If not, jira could still be used for that. > >>>>> > >>>>> I think duplicating data between jira and the PR is kind of > >>>>> pointless. I feel like the github PRs and the cide going in should > >>>>> be the source of truth, not a random third party tool. > >>>>> > >>>>> For the 4.9 release notes, i built a tool to generate the release > >>>>> notes from the PRs merged in that release. I think that is easier > >>>>> and more accurate than depending on jira since it does not track > >>>>> the actual code tree. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thats my 0.02$. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Jun 29, 2017 5:25 AM, "Paul Angus" <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Such a view of CloudStack is what holds CloudStack back. > >>>>> It stops users/operators from having any chance of understanding > >>>>> what CloudStack does and how it does it. > >>>>> Code for code's sake is no use to anyone. > >>>>> Jira is about communication between developers and to everyone else. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Kind regards, > >>>>> > >>>>> Paul Angus > >>>>> > >>>>> paul.an...@shapeblue.com > >>>>> www.shapeblue.com > >>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > >>>>> Sent: 29 June 2017 10:14 > >>>>> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > >>>>> Subject: Re: JIRA - PLEASE READ > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Paul Angus > >>>>> <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> + Release notes will be impossible to create without a proper > >>>>>> + Jira > >>>>>> > >>>>> history. > >>>>> > >>>>>> And no one will know what has gone into CloudStack. > >>>>>> > >>>>> No they are not mr Grumpy. they should be base on the code anyway, > >>>>> hence on git, not jira. I do not appose to the use of Jira but it > >>>>> is not required for good coding practices and as we are not and > >>>>> will not function as a corporation, jira is an extra for those > >>>>> that grave for it. not a requirement. > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Daan > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Ron Wheeler > >>>> President > >>>> Artifact Software Inc > >>>> email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > >>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler > >>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > >>>> > >>>> > >> -- > >> Ron Wheeler > >> President > >> Artifact Software Inc > >> email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > >> skype: ronaldmwheeler > >> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > >> > > > > > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > > >
