On Nov 1, 2019, at 1:33 PM, Thanh ha <zxiiro@...> wrote:

On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 at 15:07, JamO Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...> wrote:

On 11/1/19 10:50 AM, Robert Varga wrote:

On 01/11/2019 00:48, Abhijit Kumbhare wrote:

Hi TSC members,

During the TSC meeting today (Oct 31, 2019) Robert asked the TSC how
should we deal with projects which should be under the TSC purview due
to lack of active members. Example: DLUX which is not part of the
current simultaneous release - but still need fixes for the previous
releases SRs. Robert had an excellent suggestion that since these
projects are in a way managed by the TSC but have no longer any active
members - all the TSC members should be committers on these projects.
This way we would be able to merge any absolutely needed code changes to
the project. There was an overall consensus on this - but it would be
important to have a conversation around this - followed by a vote.

I would like to note that the proposal hinges on the project being dead
and the TSC already taking an action -- DLUX is under consideration for
archival. The aim is to define an alternative to archiving the project,
but this may become useful in different situations as well -- which we
can consider when such a situation arises.

I think there are three topics here that need to be clarified via a
discussion & a vote:

*Topic 1:* What are the criteria to have a project under the TSC purview? 

In my opinion, the minimum criteria would be: 

  * The TSC should think that the project is important enough to make it
    under TSC purview. Instead of specifying specific rules for what is
    an important project, I think this should be decided on a case by
    case basis by a TSC vote. 
  * These projects have no active committers. Implicitly having no
    active committers also means that the project has no objections to
    be under the TSC purview. 
  * The above two should be the minimum criteria. Not all the projects
    which satisfy the above two criteria should be put under the TSC
    purview. Whether a particular project should be under the TSC
    purview, should be decided by a TSC vote.

+1. I am not sure about timing -- perhaps this process can become
available sooner than the 18 month archival period?

+1 

Maybe once a project goes for a single release with zero activity (I propose gerrit
be the data we use) we can allow for TSC to become committers on that project
and after 3 releases with no activity we'll be at the 18month period and can decide
to archive or not.

+1 I think this makes a lot of sense. 

*Topic 2*: Should the TSC be committers on a project under TSC purview? 

+1, TSC members should be committers on the project, making their vote
equivalent to the decision of committers on any other project. This
should include the nomination and approval of non-TSC committers to the
project -- which would be a step towards the project coming out of TSC
purview and resuming normal life...

+1

+1

 

*Topic 3*: Does the TSC agree that DLUX should be under the TSC purview?

+1.

+1

 

+1

 

We should also consider l2switch, as it seems to be close to being in
working state here:
https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/c/l2switch/+/85209 and it is a
useful example on getting started on development.

totally agree. there are always questions about l2switch in the wild. I2switch + dlux
was normally everyone's first introduction to ODL as a whole.

Agreed.

Thanh

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#18288): https://lists.opendaylight.org/g/release/message/18288
Mute This Topic: https://lists.opendaylight.org/mt/40453808/1217165
Group Owner: release+owner@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.opendaylight.org/g/release/unsub  [ecelgp@...]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-