Hi, I hope we can nominate Ondrej as a new maintainer really soon. Whatever are the reasons for the lack of activity of the current maintainers being listed, we need a solution. We also started making patches on our own, to overcome bugs and issues. This is a very bad situation for all of us who believe in open source projects.
Regards Max Max Kholmyansky Software Architect - SURE Universal Ltd. http://www.sureuniversal.com On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Ondrej Tomcik <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear devs, > > > > A month ago I started the discussion regarding the cloud project > maintainers. > > Short summary: > > · Cloud is not maintained from release 1.3.0 > > · Cloud maintainers are not replying to messages > > · Further development, roadmap – missing > > > > In Apr 24 and May 30 I issued 2 merge requests from our patch repository. > These are just the smallest and easiest ones. I didn’t receive any comment, > nor message. > > Don’t know how else should I point to the inactivity in this subproject. > > > > My proposal is to take over the cloud subproject. > > I would like to nominate myself as the maintainer and Peter Rafaj and > Jozef Kralik as sub-maintainers. These guys are from the Kistler > Instrumente AG – OCF member. > > Our goal would be to: > > · Stabilize current solution with our patches > > · Propose new scalable design fully compliant to the OCF Native > Cloud Specification to the community > > · Implementation of the OCF Native Cloud > > > > @Dwarka what are the next steps? > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > > > *Ondrej Tomcik **:: **KISTLER **:: **measure, analyze, inovate* > > > > *From:* Macieira, Thiago [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, May 14, 2018 9:14 PM > *To:* Tomcik Ondrej; Uze Choi > *Subject:* RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Start discussions in the ML about your objectives and start sending code. > The maintainer has reported he’s still present so he’ll either review your > submissions and participate in the discussion, or we’ll have to proceed to > replace with someone who will (could be you). > > > > *From:* Ondrej Tomcik <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Monday, May 14, 2018 7:21 AM > *To:* Uze Choi <[email protected]>; Macieira, Thiago < > [email protected]> > *Subject:* RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello Uze, Thiago, > > > > Now I am bit puzzled what are the next steps. What is your opinion? > > > > BR > > > > *Ondrej Tomcik **:: **KISTLER **:: **measure, analyze, inovate* > > > > *From:* Tomcik Ondrej > *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:23 AM > *To:* '[email protected]'; Uze Choi; [email protected] > *Cc:* Daniel Park; Peter Moonki Hong > *Subject:* RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello. > > > > We (Kistler Instrumente AG) would welcome an option to maintain and > develop further IoTivity Cloud, together with other contributors who are > interested. > > > > We have experts in the company as we are already building highly available > and distributed systems. That’s why we need to enable the IoTivity to be > highly available and scalable as well, as it is technology and standard we > have chosen. > > > > Thanks > > > > *Ondrej Tomcik **:: **KISTLER **:: **measure, analyze, inovate* > > > > *From:* Jee Hyeok Kim [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2018 8:56 AM > *To:* Tomcik Ondrej; Uze Choi; [email protected] > *Cc:* Daniel Park; Peter Moonki Hong > *Subject:* RE: RE: Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello Ondrej, > > > > Thank you for your advice and sorry about my irresponsible attitude. > > I realized that important part of cloud feature is High Availability and > Scalibility where IoTivity Cloud doesn't have. > > To achive that cloud needs to be redesigned from bottom to top and need > many expert's conrtibution where we are not ready for that. > > (That's reason we can not go further on current cloud implementation) > > So my proposition is bring new well-known/concrete basement and add OCF > specific features. > > > > I'm sorry little bit late to response your message, hard to answer and > also make direction. > > Any other opinions are welcome. > > > > Best Regards > > JK > > > > --------- *Original Message* --------- > > *Sender* : Ondrej Tomcik <[email protected]> > > *Date* : 2018-05-08 15:39 (GMT+9) > > *Title* : RE: Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello JK, > > > > Tomorrow we have a meeting together with Scott, where we will discuss few > aspects of IoTivity cloud redesign. > > I will provide you more information tomorrow guys. > > > > Long story short: > > High level design idea from Scott point of view is good. That’s how we > want to go on. But: > > > > Scott’s idea is to get rid of current cloud project in the IoTivity Cloud > and integrate it based on specification into the Mainflux. > > I am not convinced yet as the effort which is needed is huge and I don’t > see BIG added value of this technology stack change. > > PoC of the IoTivity Cloud is a good base. It needs some redesign, but from > an effort point of view it cannot be compared with Scott’s solution. > > > > So, I am still gathering more information to have a good basis for > decision. A or B, or event C. We will make some proposals, discuss it also > with CNCF group and Mainflux developers and decide. > > > > > > But my main question is, how is it with Samsung and current maintenance > team of IoTivity Cloud Project? > > You’re often not responding – and you’re the only one from the team who > will sometimes reply, and with big delay. > > There is no update of IoTivity cloud from release of 1.3.0. No roadmap is > provided, no information is available. OCF Cloud WG is inactive. I am very > surprised that this is accepted in an open source project. No offence, I > believe that team is working on different project and is not allocated for > this one, but that’s not how it should be from open source project point of > view. > > > > Cloud Native Foundation, which is part of the Linux Foundation – same as > IoTivity! is far forward. There is no communication between us (and as I > said, we are both members of Linux Foundation!), we should be in a regular > contact with them and provide CNCF enabled IoT project without discussion. > > > > > > OCF and IoTivity C/C++ part have future. It needs some impuls as well but > it’s healthy. Cloud unfortunately not. My goal is clear, be part of CNCF > projects, have more maintainers, not only from one company and provide OCF > enabled cloud as IoTivity project. > > If it will be redesign of the current solution, or a new project, that’s > not so important. That will be evaluated. > > > > By the way, I never asked. What is your opinion Uze, Thiago, Moonki about > a current state of the IoTivity project in general? Is it healthy? > > > > > > *Youtube -> IoTivity -> thanks to Thiago, PCoval and others, there were > talks on conferences. In 2016. Now?* > > > > BR > > > > *Ondrej Tomcik **:: **KISTLER **:: **measure, analyze, inovate* > > > > *From:* Jee Hyeok Kim [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 8, 2018 3:38 AM > *To:* Tomcik Ondrej; Uze Choi; [email protected] > *Cc:* Daniel Park; Peter Moonki Hong > *Subject:* RE: Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello Ondrej, > > > > I'm really sorry not able to response and follow open-source also. > > We were holiday so I can answer today. > > I also read Scott's redesign concept and it is very good opportunity > to change current POC to commercial ready. > > I'll check from my side that which approach is good for this case that > create another project or > > re-use existing space. > > Can you share your opinion what is best for you ? > > > > Best Regards > > JK > > > > --------- *Original Message* --------- > > *Sender* : Ondrej Tomcik <[email protected]> > > *Date* : 2018-05-05 02:35 (GMT+9) > > *Title* : Re: Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello gentlemen, > > Any update? > > > > I also want to ask you, was there any communication with CNCF or EdgeX? > > > > BR > > Ondrej > > > On 2 May 2018, at 12:16, 최우제 (Uze Choi) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ondrej, > > > > We reached the maintainer JK again. > > Please hold on. He might respond soon. > > > > BR, Uze Choi > > *From:* Ondrej Tomcik [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 02, 2018 7:14 PM > *To:* 최우제 (Uze Choi); [email protected] > *Subject:* Cloud maintainers > > > > Hello Uze, Thiago, > > > > I think there were no objections to change maintainers of IoTivity Cloud. > Therefore, if you agree, I would propose to update the list. > > > > We also started discussion with Scott King and Max Kohlmyansky, and we > will toghether prepare in case of new features/redesign concept and > documentation, which I will present to relevant WGs before implementation. > > > > BR > > > > *Ondrej Tomcik **:: **KISTLER **:: **measure, analyze, inovate* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#9693): https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/message/9693 Mute This Topic: https://lists.iotivity.org/mt/20404834/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
