Ah, I didnt know ASF infra is ok to let Github as main source repo for a podling.
I stand corrected. - Henry On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I second John, about Github uses. > > > > The statement "As a community we would like to keep the master repository > > as well as issue tracking on GitHub > > <https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/GitHub>" at currently stand is a > no-no > > and putting in proposal would make it as goal which at this time not an > > option in ASF infra. > > > > As a *podling*, their use of GitHub is an acceptable option within ASF > Infra. [1] > > As a TLP, it is NOT. > > Thus, when they want to graduate: either Infra has ready to give any TLP > the option of using GitHub as their primary focal point of development (and > OpenWhisk gets to use that option) ... or OpenWhisk must move to the > ASF-supported, non-GitHub option. > > Infra is hoping to provide the GitHub option, but we have no date. We have > development to do, we have risks that we can't do what is needed, etc etc. > If OpenWhisk reaches a discussion about graduation, and Infra has not > completed such work, then the OpenWhisk community will have a decision on > wait or shift their development focal point. > > Cheers, > Greg Stein > Infrastructure Administrator, ASF > > [1] only OpenWhisk. at this time, no other podling is approved for such > deployment, from an Infra standpoint. ... and as John notes: IPMC is > ultimately in charge of how podlings operate. I merely state that Infra > will support this concrete case, which I believe is a good experiment. > there are things to learn about whether this will work/not for podlings. > (eg. normally IPMC members get to randomly commit to podlings, how is that > done w.r.t GitHub? do we get all commit emails? issue emails? etc) >
