Difference between revisions of "Architecture Council/Meetings/August 11 2016"

Revision as of 11:57, 11 August 2016

Meeting Title:	Architecture Council Monthly Meeting
Date & Time:	Thursday August 11, 2016 at 1100 Ottawa HTML | iCal
Dial-in:	Let's use the Foundation's Asterisk setup for this call: North America (toll free) 1-866-569-4992 Germany (local call anywhere in Germany) 49-692-2224-6059 France (local call anywhere in France) 33-17-070-8535 Switzerland (local call anywhere in Switzerland) +41-44-580-2115 Spain, Sweden, others - see Asterisk/Numbers Participant conference extension: 701 then enter pin: 51968 SIP clients can call 701@asterisk.eclipse.org, then enter pin 51968.

Agenda / Notes

• Feel free to edit, but not during the call!
• Last meeting: Architecture Council/Meetings/June 9 2016 -- open actions see #Action_Items

Jonas: bug 499399 Eclipse Infrastructure - Uptime and speed

• Not meant as an offence, but there is a general perception (from clients) that the Eclipse.org infra is unstable
  • Build servers, Gerrit, Wiki, Eclipsecon.org ... even PUBLIC services like Eclipsecon.org were very slow and then down for 2 days !
  • Why is Eclipsecon.org run internally and not on the Cloud ?
  • No suggestion for a solution, but the perception causes harm to the Community !
  • Some people already moved away, or are considering to go away ("...have to wait 3 days until a build is done...")
  • Just a perception or is it a real problem (around uptime and speed) ?
  • Is the infra too complex to host with a given budget ?

• Dani: Agrees with the perception - issues started some time last year, already raised on the Board meeting
  • Please point to specific issues seen, if possible ... would like to stick to Eclipse.org, others might be worse in respect to response time

• Wayne: Please CC webmaster@eclipse.org on the bug
  • What are the core services that need to be at Eclipse.org, which others could be offloaded ?
  • For example, some projects want to use 3rd party services, which can't be hosted at Eclipse.org anyways
  • Webmaster been playing with Cloud services managed by the Eclipse Foundation (though surveys indicate hosting ourselves is more cost effective ... but then can't dynamically scale up)
  • Maybe we're at a crossing point where Cloud should be considered for some services at least

• Doug: In general happy with how things are going, just noticed some issues around the yearly release

• ACTION: Please collect data on issues / outages that led to a bad perception ?
• ACTION: What services need to be on Eclipse.org , which services could reasonably be outside ?
  • Put this data on bug 499399

Tyler Jewell: EDP and distributing via Docker images

• Wayne: Most projects produce some sort of a download to be consumed ("traditional model")
• This doesn't make much sense for Che - Docker makes much more sense there ("docker run eclipse/che")
  • Wayne secured the "eclipse" organization on dockerhub, investigating how to manage that with the Community
  • Already connected with the Mosquito project for input
  • Docker had some changes recently (Windows vs Linux etc) now pushing forward

• What does this mean with respect to the IP policy ?
  • It does make sense for Che to be consumable via docker for easy consumption
  • For consumers building their customized projects, it still makes sense for Docker to be "buildable" and to maintain an IP Log
  • Martin: Not so much concerned about the mechanics of downloads ... more concerned about the meaning of "exempt pre-req" (related to docker pre-req?) as well as download scanning software which checks downloads against the IP Log
  • Maybe if consumers are happy with whatever comes from dockerhub, it doesn't make sense for the EF to place additional constraints / restrictions

Wayne Changes to IP Policy

EF is working on a change to the IP Policy as blogged by Mike recently

• Introducing a new, lighter-weight type of due diligence (license check on contained code only - no provenance)
  • Only check what a project "claims" for Type A releases, but not check if it's actually true
• Projects could choose to be "Type A" or "Type B" per release
  • Expecting that Vertex would move to Type A ... others to do some releases Type A, and at some point do Type B
  • Sounds very similar to "parallel IP process" -- how to mark up what is what? How to deal with aggregates as being Type A or Type B ?
  • Wayne: Mature projects couldn't be Type B - only for Incubating ones. Helps them work out which software / licenses they actually need.

• Jonas: Has there been any survey on what Eclipse.org consumers actually want ?
  • There's a feeling that Eclipse.org actually does more than most companies do ... consumers like that, but is it actually necessary ? For example if node.js is used...

Wayne: New AC Members

• ACTION Wayne propose candidate

Martin: UUID / Call Home Policy

• Got in touch with Ian Skerret: No current plans on resurrecting UUID / data gathering. If there ever is, Ian would reach out to the AC.
• Jonas: Any conclusion on cleaning up existing UUIDs ?
  • Currently not discussed as an issue, since UUIDs were only generated in milestone builds. Feel free to reopen if this is considered an issue.

Wayne: Inactive Projects

• Projects that are not actively maintained but still considered useful
  • RSE, some modeling projects, ...
  • Discussion on bug

• Projects that get funding initially, but stop when the funding ends - dysfunctional projects
  • Once funding returns, new committers restart - EDP has this as an exception, but not as a standard practice
  • This basically sacrifices meritocracy - how big of a deal is this ? Concerned about projects that lack continuity
  • Problem if EF has to constantly teach the committers the process ... if they went to Github, they'd have a hard time handing the keys from one to the next
  • Discussion on bug , answer might be we don't care

Attendees

All AC Members are invited.

• PMC Reps please confirm attendance or list your delegate below. Every PMC is required to name a primary and backup delegate, and to ensure that one delegate attends the meeting.

All Attendees

• Regrets:

• In attendance: Wayne Beaton, Jonas Helming, Dani Megert, Martin O, Doug Schaefer, Michael Scharf

Next Meeting

• Architecture Council/Meetings/September 8 2016