Actually adding general@ for guidance on the process -----Original Message----- From: Ross Gardler [mailto:ross.gard...@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 3:21 PM To: d...@ripple.incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: Ripple to be retired from the incubator?
Looks like there is consensus here. I'm not sure of the process as I've never been through it before so copying general@incubator for guidance. General@ the Ripple Podling has consensus on retiring itself from the Apache Incubator - what needs to be done? Ross -----Original Message----- From: Brent Lintner [mailto:brent.lint...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 7:00 AM To: d...@ripple.incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? +1 to retirement. Makes sense. :) On Sun, Nov 22, 2015, 22:14 Ross Gardler <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote: > I've already checked the expectation with trademarks@ in anticipation > for this question. Normally assignment of trademarks happens upon > graduation and it seems, from a cursory check, that this is the case > for Ripple. In other words you need the permission of RIM/Blackberry > Ltd as the owners of the mark (I'm not sure what the legal status is there). > > Whoever wants to "own" the project moving forwards need to make a > formal request. First to tradema...@apache.org to check the ASF > doesn't actually own it and then to RIM/Blackberry. > > Ross > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Barham [mailto:tim.bar...@microsoft.com] > Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2015 4:59 PM > To: d...@ripple.incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? > > +1 from me also. > > Also, in addition to Parashu's questions, how do we go about getting > approval to keep the Ripple name? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Parashuram N [mailto:panar...@microsoft.com] > Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2015 2:27 AM > To: d...@ripple.incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? > > +1 to retiring it and moving to Github. What would be the process of > retiring it, and what is the timeframe that we are looking at ? > > > > > On 11/17/15, 9:03 AM, "Raymond Camden" <raymondcam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >+1 for retiring and moving it to GitHub. > > > >On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:53 AM, Christian Grobmeier > ><c...@grobmeier.de> > wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> from my observations over the long time I was mentoring this > >> project I can say it was always an up and down. People wanted to > >> progress, but it never happened as day jobs prevented it. I think > >> around the time Chrome introduced some tooling in that direction > >> (even when its missing advanced mobile features) interest decreased even > >> more. > >> > >> Today I see not much activity. > >> > >> Personally I think a project like Ripple does not have a chance to > >> build a vibrant community here. GitHub might be a better place, as > >> there are no formalities involved. > >> > >> I am +1 for retiring the project. > >> > >> I am bit sad about this, as I always hoped the ASF would become a > >> bit less Java centric, also bringing its benefits to other environments. > >> Unfortunately I have not seen many successful web related projects > >> (ignoring Cordova a little). > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Christian > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Christian Grobmeier > >> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.gr > obmeier.de&data=01%7c01%7cpanarasi%40microsoft.com%7c9874214c8d9745aaf > 6ee08d2ef7114e8%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=QnkKuyVwZ > %2fLBX7ZPypAzLlvIwaLZOFbnCZJF9qnXQJE%3d > >> > >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww > >> .t > >> imeandbill.de&data=01%7c01%7cpanarasi%40microsoft.com%7c9874214c8d9 > >> 74 > >> 5aaf6ee08d2ef7114e8%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=7k > >> BT SXX1Lp5%2fFXs%2fuCX9%2bZlOZOEKzJolOUjcNtZtJN0%3d > >> > >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015, at 00:50, Ross Gardler wrote: > >>> Retiring it means the code is not being managed and thus there are > >>> no changes to it in the ASF. > >>> > >>> People can fork the code and take it elsewhere, but not > >>> necessarily using the name Ripple - approval would be required to take > >>> the name. > >>> Under no circumstances would the name Apache Ripple be permitted. > >>> > >>> A project cannot stay in the incubator forever. Either there is an > >>> active community around it (or work towards an active community) > >>> or it will be retired from the incubator. There is activity on the > >>> code, but there is no oversight on the health of the project and > >>> thus no real potential for community growth. At this point the > >>> community is not large enough to must the required oversight and > >>> thus > cannot graduate. > >>> > >>> The existing community therefore need to evaluate whether Apache > >>> is the right place for them. If the only goal is to fix bugs then > >>> I would suggest it may not be an appropriate home. > >>> > >>> Ross > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Parashuram N [mailto:panar...@microsoft.com] > >>> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 3:28 PM > >>> To: d...@ripple.incubator.apache.org > >>> Subject: RE: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? > >>> > >>> Hi Ross, > >>> > >>> Thanks for bringing this up. I wanted to understand the > >>> implication of retiring a project, vs graduating it. > >>> Does retiring a project also mean that we cannot change the code, > >>> add bug fixes, etc ? While you are right that there may be no big > >>> features planned and that Ripple is largely complete for its use > >>> case, does retiring mean that we cannot fix bugs ? > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Ross Gardler [mailto:ross.gard...@microsoft.com] > >>> Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2015 11:38 AM > >>> To: d...@ripple.incubator.apache.org > >>> Subject: Ripple to be retired from the incubator? > >>> > >>> (BCC private@IPMC as I am speaking as an IPMC member but will > >>> follow up on the Ripple dev list as is appropriate) > >>> > >>> Hello Ripplers, please note the '?' in the subject. I just wanted > >>> to ensure I got the attention of PPMC members because the IPMC is > >>> asking this question and PPMC members need to respond. > >>> > >>> In February I stepped up to help the very small Ripple community > >>> get a release out in response to the IPMC wondering whether the > >>> project had the legs to graduate. With my offer to help the IPMC > >>> agreed to give the podling time (6 months) before reviewing again. > >>> We are now at 10 months from that date. > >>> > >>> Some great work by the Ripple team resulted in a few releases > >>> (including that all important first release with the fine tuning > >>> that is initially so time consuming). In addition a couple of new > committers were added. > >>> Today there is a slow trickle of work going on in JIRA and the > codebase. > >>> By my assessment the PPMC is in a reasonable shape, though it is > >>> not large enough to graduate. But there is no obvious community > >>> action, > i.e. > >>> no visible interaction between contributors on the future of > >>> Ripple and this no place for newcomers to engage. > >>> > >>> I recognize that the project is small and largely "complete" with > >>> respect to its current use cases. It looks to be in maintenance > >>> mode. This is not necessarily a problem. All we are looking for is > >>> a community that is welcoming to newcomers. But it must also have > >>> appropriate oversight from at least 3 active PPMC members > >>> (otherwise it can't get a release out the door). I don't see that > >>> this will change unless the existing PPMC actively seek to do so. > >>> > >>> Since Ripple is now 4 months overdue on its IPMC reports the IPMC > >>> is once again wondering what is going on in the land of Ripple. > >>> > >>> Two things *must* happen: > >>> > >>> > >>> 1) A discussion, on the public dev list, with respect to the > health > >>> of the Ripple project. This can take one of two angles, depending > >>> on the needs of the active PPMC members here. It can be a proposal > >>> to retire the project from the Incubator on the grounds that it > >>> will not be able to muster enough interest to graduate, or it can > >>> be a discussion on the short to medium term future of the project, > >>> along with a plan to grow the PPMC to a suitable size to allow graduation. > >>> If the second option is taken the goal should be to demonstrate > >>> activity with the project with the explicit intention of drawing > >>> out any interested lurkers on the mailing list. Only the PPMC > >>> members can make the call as to which is the right approach. > >>> > >>> 2) An IPMC report must be submitted describing the state of the > >>> project and highlighting the action taken in 1) along with a > >>> timeframe before the project should be re-evaluated by the IPMC. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Ross > >>> > > > > > > > >-- > >===================================================================== > >== ==== Raymond Camden, Developer Advocate for MobileFirst at IBM > > > >Email : raymondcam...@gmail.com > >Blog : > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.raymondcamden. > >co > >m&data=01%7c01%7cpanarasi%40microsoft.com%7c9874214c8d9745aaf6ee08d2e > >f7 > >114e8%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=lcXR%2brtdPndHRedR > >U8 > >LTjfa0rAB9Gl0QLFp9fVO9XlE%3d > >Twitter: raymondcamden >
