Request for Input: 2 weeks comment period for moving to the CDF

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

This is the formal call for input for the decision to move the Jenkins project to the newly forming Continuous Delivery Foundation. (I was told that my earlier attempt to just change the subject didn't create a wholly new thread, hence this email)

Speaking as the board, if we are to pull the trigger and formalize this new home, given the magnitude of the proposal, we need to make a binding decision and record it as such. Given that this seems to be a topic that relatively small number of people care about, and that those reactions so far have been overwhelmingly positive, the board would like to set 2 weeks comment period ending on Feb 22nd, where we solicit anyone's organized thoughts on why you think we should or shouldn't move the Jenkins project under the proposed CDF. You can write it here, or if need be, send the board a private email at jenkins...@googlegroups.com. We'll consider and respond to them, and provided that there still remains a significant consensus (like the one that we are seeing so far), then the board will make the binding decision.

Not much of the existing structure of the Jenkins project will change. Committers, contributors, officers, teams, the board, and all that will still remain (including all the "normalization" work like voting.) The idea is that the board and officers of the Jenkins project will be the "oversight body of each TOC Project" (charter 7-b-i) and this links the chain of authority of the CDF and the Jenkins project. Our existing technical decision making process of JEP, SIG, PR, etc remain under our control. The whole of the draft charter can be seen here. Again, if anyone has questions, concerns, and/or opinions, I'd love to hear those.

Please keep the discussion going. Organized thoughts are always better, but if you just want to pile on your +1, that'd be appreciated, too :-)

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Rick]

Hi KK,

Thanks for giving more details about the CDF. This is all good from my perspective. Just one question I want to ask.

I know the main structure will remain. But how the relationship is going between SIG and Committee? Another similar question is about the ambassador. The CDF and Jenkins will both have the ambassador or just one of them.

Best regards,

Rick

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z7Q9jXL4PqfqVbBvmjsNy5B6uzEP%2BgnMFu0%2BnGQ6sLXw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

https://github.com/LinuxSuRen

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

Thanks for the question, Rick.

There will be Jenkins level things and CDF level things.

The SIGs that we currently have are Jenkins level entities. In the short term all of them will remain as is. Over time, I think it makes a lot of sense that some SIGs be formed at the CDF level --- for example, advocacy of Continuous Delivery is one project I'd love to see move forward, and it makes a lot more sense to do that at the CDF level than at the Jenkins level. When/if CDF-level SIG happens, it's conceivable that some Jenkins-level SIGs be morphed into CDF-level SIG.

The CDF charter outlines committees that are defined at the CDF level. More/less might get created over time by the decision of the CDF GB.

The same thing with Ambassador. For the short term Jenkins-level ambassador will remain, but I think it also makes sense that the ambassadors be uplifted to the CDF level thing, especially if that makes this program bigger and better resourced. If after a discussion this is determined to be the case, then I think that's what's going to happen.

Ultimately, my understanding is that it's really up to people who are interested in driving things forward to evolve the structure, like how we've been doing it in this project for the past decade. For the most part, it's not like those structures are cast in stone by the current charter. It's a living evolving document that we shape, and what we have right now is "just" a starting point.

Does that help?

2019年2月12日(火) 17:28 Rick <linux...@gmail.com>:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAMM7nTGx5c2LPacrKSCZQ6-ASjRftvJLm2%2BS8iynyCDbeQigQA%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Rick]

Thanks for your explanation. It's helpful to me.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4yjKABoZJ2V0%2Bp92u3HmwfzHqgPoOJfvtOs4o_TQMvvqA%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

https://github.com/LinuxSuRen

[R. Tyler Croy]

(replies inline)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:

> This is the formal call for input for the decision to move the Jenkins
> project to the newly forming Continuous Delivery Foundation. (I was told
> that my earlier attempt

> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/jenkinsci-dev/1w57jl3K4S4/G1LvRwZEFgAJ> to

> just change the subject didn't create a wholly new thread, hence this email)

Thanks for splitting this out into a new thread, just to make sure people have
the opportunity to see it.


I'm personally excited for this move, so if I am unable to attend the meeting
next week due to work getting in the way, consider this my emphatic +1 in
support of Jenkins moving to the CDF!




Cheers


--
GitHub: https://github.com/rtyler

GPG Key ID: 0F2298A980EE31ACCA0A7825E5C92681BEF6CEA2

[Slide]

This sounds great, especially after discussing with Tyler about code signing keys and how hard they are to get as an organization under the SPI. I think this will be a great thing for Jenkins.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/20190214143004.GO23906%40grape.brokenco.de.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Website: http://earl-of-code.com

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

Ah, code signing keys. Great point.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPiUgVeOSNsM08yGPr4D_ThcGT0pSS3LvArTdqd1HPoCxNyG9w%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi