A new home for Jenkins

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

Ever since our project got our present ‘Jenkins’ name in 2011, we’ve always been conscious about the governance of this project. It’s a key part of ensuring the well-being of the project. We’ve not only talked the talk, but done some walking the walk too, such as team, JEP, and SIG.

One idea in this space that we’ve discussed in and out is software foundation around Jenkins. Those of you who came to Jenkins World Contributor Summit in 2017 might remember Tyler presenting this idea under the name “Jenkins Software Foundation” (see slides and notes), at the DevOps World | Jenkins World Contributor Summit in 2018 and afterwards, Tracy has helped continue this conversation (see slides).

Why?

In a nutshell, the “problems” we are trying to solve here are:

• Limits to current support and services - Software in the Public Interest, which currently hosts Jenkins, is a fairly modest “limited service” non-profit organization. I love what they do, but we could use more help; entering into legal contracts, setting up recurring payment that doesn’t go through my own personal credit card. These inabilities hamper the growth of the project.
  
  
• High barrier to participation by corporate contributors - Our unique governance structure makes it unnecessarily hard for corporate contributors to come in and feel at home. We aren’t an Apache project, an Eclipse project, nor a company-owned project like Chef or Spring. We are just a little too unique to be understood by corporate open-source offices, lawyers, and pointy-haired bosses. The net result is that we lose out on their participation and contributions — money and people. I’ve been on the phone with some of those companies myself, and so has Tracy.
  
  
• Misperception that Jenkins is owned by CloudBees - A common perception error is that Jenkins is a CloudBees project, when it really isn’t. But this perception is self-perpetuating. We want a long-term structure to keep Jenkins alive and thriving, and not being tied to the fate of any single entity is a key requirement. We want more companies to participate in Jenkins, feel a co-ownership, and push Jenkins forward together.
  
  
• Need to coordinated broader community of contributors - On the people front, it used to be that the bulk of the forward motion in this project came from individual plugin developers. Today, where we need to move forward requires more organized contributors and skills other than coding. Blue Ocean was a good example. So was Config as Code, where it took the persistence of two corporate contributors. Pipeline Authoring SIG to me is another young example where if you look at the key participants, it really represents organizations and what they are concerned about.
  
  
• Raising and using money well - On the money front, we are not tapping our ability to raise money, and we lack the ability to use it effectively. On the few occasions that we did a donation drive, we have shown incredible ability to raise money, but I know we can do a few orders of magnitude more. Plus, this kind of irregular income is difficult to make the most of, because it’s hard to enter into recurring expenses. Also, without our own legal entity, we lack the ability to turn the money into what’s most precious — people!

Given all this, the Jenkins board, CloudBees (as the biggest contributor), and the Linux Foundation kept exploring this foundation idea beyond those contributor summits. We have floated some ideas with some of the companies participating in the ecosystem. Thoughts have evolved, ideas turned into more concrete plans, and I think it has developed to a point where this is beginning to look real, and really makes a lot of sense for the project.

What?

So here are the key ideas/features of the foundation:

• We are calling it “Continuous Delivery Foundation” (CDF), and it will have a broader charter. It will house not just Jenkins but other open-source projects in this space. Through the CDF, we want to create open-source solutions collectively addressing the whole software development lifecycle, to foster and sustain the ecosystem of open-source, vendor-neutral projects through collaborations and interoperability, then finally to advocate these ideas and encourage collaborations among practitioners to share and improve their practices.
  
  
• The CDF will be a sub-foundation under the Linux Foundation, and it’s somewhat like CNCF, The Linux Foundation has experience running lots of sub-foundations in different situations, which will be a great asset.
  
  
• The CDF will have corporate members paying annual dues, which would create a stable budget hopefully in the range of $100Ks to $1M+, which translates to infra cost, LF staff that works on the CDF, events and meetups, travel grants, etc.
  
  
• The CDF will have contributors — you — who may or may not come from corporate members. The technical decision making continues to be based on meritocracy— autonomy of the plugins, code review process for core, JEP, and other established implicit and explicit practices around code do not change just because of the CDF. Also, when your employer joins the CDF as a member, you will have an easier time participating in Jenkins more actively because your organization understands what you are doing better.
  
  
• The CDF will have several decision-making bodies, such as the governance board, the technical oversight committee, and the outreach committee. The governance board is ultimately where the buck stops, and if you look at the Jenkins governance board today, you can see how it’s possible that technical decision making is separated from this. The technical oversight committee is for coordination between projects under the CDF, design a project lifecycle under the CDF. The outreach committee is for the noise making — events, marketing, advocacy, that sort of things.
  
  
• The CDF will have multiple projects, which are somewhat loosely connected to the CDF, by connecting the Jenkins governance board under the TOC in the CDF. What we are suggesting here is that we take Jenkins and Jenkins X as separate projects under the CDF, as a reflection of the reality today that these two sibling projects operate differently.
  
  
• As an added bonus, the LF has a legal representation in China, and our recent experience suggests this would be helpful. This is just in time for our growing Chinese community.

Also, just to avoid any misunderstanding, this isn’t CloudBees trying to slowly pull out of Jenkins. As you saw in 2018, CloudBees went all in on many new efforts, and this will continue. This is more of an aggressive growth play. We want more folks to join the project so that we can push it forward faster. There’s so much to do!!

Next Steps

This is really only a high-level overview, but it’s already a lot to chew on. This plan isn’t cast in stone, this is a multi-party dance to find and agree on something mutually beneficial, of which the Jenkins project is a key participant. I know people will need details to get a clearer picture of what this thing is, and we will provide that soon, but first I’d also like to encourage people to look at and comment on the big picture, not just the details — it’s a bit like the difference between commenting on a JEP vs. commenting on pull requests.

Needless to say, this is a collective decision for us, one that requires a significant level of consensus. This email is meant to start that conversation, and I’m looking forward to it.

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Marky Jackson]

This is very exciting and welcoming!!!

--
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/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Oliver Gondža]

Those are interesting news. Are we expecting to partner with existing
communities around existing CD projects as a part of CDF? Are some of
them on board with this vision or do we expect they will join us
provided this turns out to be the right way to go? My concern is the
“Continuous Delivery Foundation” feels pretty general and while getting
under the wings of Linux Foundation is an impressive recognition of what
we have achieved, it would be unfortunate to make an impression of
claiming the whole field without wider consensus.

On 16/01/2019 20.01, Marky Jackson wrote:
> This is very exciting and welcoming!!!
>
>> On Jan 16, 2019, at 10:57 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <k...@kohsuke.org

>> <mailto:k...@kohsuke.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Ever since our project got our present ‘Jenkins’ name in 2011, we’ve
>> always been conscious about the governance of this project. It’s a key
>> part of ensuring the well-being of the project. We’ve not only talked
>> the talk, but done some walking the walk too, such as team

>> <https://wiki.jenkins.io/display/JENKINS/Team+Leads>, JEP
>> <https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep>, and SIG <https://jenkins.io/sigs/>.

>>
>> One idea in this space that we’ve discussed in and out is software
>> foundation around Jenkins. Those of you who came to Jenkins World
>> Contributor Summit in 2017 might remember Tyler presenting this idea
>> under the name “Jenkins Software Foundation” (see slides

>> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1E3sUlRnfG-Dpmj-Lwrse56S0aUY3PBoGlenU5QwYCXg/edit#slide=id.g16abb2ffe7_0_242>
>> and notes
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JSxYNI_RuA8ITlxVmxBdFg1A-sOKz-w7a9tzuPfWmr4/edit#heading=h.hc79wlk2cwzn>),

>> at the DevOps World | Jenkins World Contributor Summit in 2018 and
>> afterwards, Tracy has helped continue this conversation (see slides

>> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Q-BGZV4H9x0Vo7QsEg-UfT04jQSJ6zuAQXahl9m3iuY/edit?usp=sharing>).
>>
>> *Why?
>> *

>> In a nutshell, the “problems” we are trying to solve here are:
>>

>> * *Limits to current support and services* - Software in the Public
>> Interest <http://spi-inc.org/>, which currently hosts Jenkins, is

>> a fairly modest “limited service” non-profit organization. I love
>> what they do, but we could use more help; entering into legal
>> contracts, setting up recurring payment that doesn’t go through my
>> own personal credit card. These inabilities hamper the growth of
>> the project.
>>

>> * *High barrier to participation by corporate contributors* - Our

>> unique governance structure makes it unnecessarily hard for
>> corporate contributors to come in and feel at home. We aren’t an
>> Apache project, an Eclipse project, nor a company-owned project
>> like Chef or Spring. We are just a little too unique to be
>> understood by corporate open-source offices, lawyers, and
>> pointy-haired bosses. The net result is that we lose out on their
>> participation and contributions — money and people. I’ve been on
>> the phone with some of those companies myself, and so has Tracy.
>>

>> * *Misperception that Jenkins is owned by CloudBees* - A common

>> perception error is that Jenkins is a CloudBees project, when it
>> really isn’t. But this perception is self-perpetuating. We want a
>> long-term structure to keep Jenkins alive and thriving, and not
>> being tied to the fate of any single entity is a key requirement.
>> We want more companies to participate in Jenkins, feel a
>> co-ownership, and push Jenkins forward together.
>>

>> * *Need to coordinated broader community of contributors* - On the

>> people front, it used to be that the bulk of the forward motion in
>> this project came from individual plugin developers. Today, where
>> we need to move forward requires more organized contributors and
>> skills other than coding. Blue Ocean was a good example. So was
>> Config as Code, where it took the persistence of two corporate
>> contributors. Pipeline Authoring SIG

>> <https://jenkins.io/sigs/pipeline-authoring/> to me is another

>> young example where if you look at the key participants, it really
>> represents organizations and what they are concerned about.
>>

>> * *Raising and using money well* - On the money front, we are not

>> tapping our ability to raise money, and we lack the ability to use
>> it effectively. On the few

>> <https://wiki.jenkins.io/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=65667489>
>> occasions
>> <https://jenkins.io/blog/2012/11/15/fundraising-for-travel-grant/>

>> that we did a donation drive, we have shown incredible ability to
>> raise money, but I know we can do a few orders of magnitude more.
>> Plus, this kind of irregular income is difficult to make the most
>> of, because it’s hard to enter into recurring expenses. Also,
>> without our own legal entity, we lack the ability to turn the
>> money into what’s most precious — people!
>>
>> Given all this, the Jenkins board, CloudBees (as the biggest
>> contributor), and the Linux Foundation kept exploring this foundation
>> idea beyond those contributor summits. We have floated some ideas with
>> some of the companies participating in the ecosystem. Thoughts have
>> evolved, ideas turned into more concrete plans, and I think it has
>> developed to a point where this is beginning to look real, and really
>> makes a lot of sense for the project.
>>

>> *What?
>> *

>> So here are the key ideas/features of the foundation:
>>

>> * We are calling it “Continuous Delivery Foundation” (CDF), and it

>> will have a broader charter. It will house not just Jenkins but
>> other open-source projects in this space. Through the CDF, we want
>> to create open-source solutions collectively addressing the whole
>> software development lifecycle, to foster and sustain the
>> ecosystem of open-source, vendor-neutral projects through
>> collaborations and interoperability, then finally to advocate
>> these ideas and encourage collaborations among practitioners to
>> share and improve their practices.
>>

>> * The CDF will be a sub-foundation under the Linux Foundation, and
>> it’s somewhat like CNCF <https://www.cncf.io/>, The Linux

>> Foundation has experience running lots of sub-foundations in
>> different situations, which will be a great asset.
>>

>> * The CDF will have corporate members paying annual dues, which

>> would create a stable budget hopefully in the range of $100Ks to
>> $1M+, which translates to infra cost, LF staff that works on the
>> CDF, events and meetups, travel grants, etc.
>>

>> * The CDF will have contributors — you — who may or may not come

>> from corporate members. The technical decision making continues to
>> be based on meritocracy— autonomy of the plugins, code review
>> process for core, JEP, and other established implicit and explicit
>> practices around code do not change just because of the CDF. Also,
>> when your employer joins the CDF as a member, you will have an
>> easier time participating in Jenkins more actively because your
>> organization understands what you are doing better.
>>

>> * The CDF will have several decision-making bodies, such as the

>> governance board, the technical oversight committee, and the
>> outreach committee. The governance board is ultimately where the
>> buck stops, and if you look at the Jenkins governance board today,
>> you can see how it’s possible that technical decision making is
>> separated from this. The technical oversight committee is for
>> coordination between projects under the CDF, design a project
>> lifecycle under the CDF. The outreach committee is for the noise
>> making — events, marketing, advocacy, that sort of things.
>>

>> * The CDF will have multiple projects, which are somewhat loosely

>> connected to the CDF, by connecting the Jenkins governance board
>> under the TOC in the CDF. What we are suggesting here is that we
>> take Jenkins and Jenkins X as separate projects under the CDF, as
>> a reflection of the reality today that these two sibling projects
>> operate differently.
>>

>> * As an added bonus, the LF has a legal representation in China, and
>> our recent experience
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAMM7nTFvfAKco%3DRxJ6jXCmwX39%2ByexfC1s8TZLwGSZ4dTLberQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>

>> suggests this would be helpful. This is just in time for our
>> growing Chinese community

>> <https://jenkins.io/sigs/chinese-localization/>.

>>
>> Also, just to avoid any misunderstanding, this isn’t CloudBees trying
>> to slowly pull out of Jenkins. As you saw in 2018

>> <https://jenkins.io/blog/2018/12/25/year-in-review/>, CloudBees went

>> all in on many new efforts, and this will continue. This is more of an
>> aggressive growth play. We want more folks to join the project so that
>> we can push it forward faster. There’s so much to do!!
>>

>> *Next Steps
>> *

>> This is really only a high-level overview, but it’s already a lot to
>> chew on. This plan isn’t cast in stone, this is a multi-party dance to
>> find and agree on something mutually beneficial, of which the Jenkins
>> project is a key participant. I know people will need details to get a
>> clearer picture of what this thing is, and we will provide that soon,
>> but first I’d also like to encourage people to look at and comment on
>> the big picture, not just the details — it’s a bit like the difference
>> between commenting on a JEP vs. commenting on pull requests.
>>
>> Needless to say, this is a collective decision for us, one that
>> requires a significant level of consensus. This email is meant to
>> start that conversation, and I’m looking forward to it.
>> --
>> Kohsuke Kawaguchi
>>
>> --
>> 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

>> <mailto:jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com>.

>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com

>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

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

> --
> 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

> <mailto:jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/290A37BE-FEDF-4707-8637-775343917FC0%40gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/290A37BE-FEDF-4707-8637-775343917FC0%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

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

--
oliver

[Rick]

This would be huge good news for Jenkins community I think. Especially for Jenkins China Community. I'm very looking forward to it. I think the CDF could provide us with a great opportunity to host more events or activities. I can image that CDF will help to bring more contributors and sponsors into the community.

Second, I need to thank KK for giving me the support and delegation to running Jenkins Subscription WeChat Account. Now we almost have 1K subscribers. One article will be published per week. And I'm willing to take the initiative to help build an activity Jenkins Community in China. I'd love to the contact person in China for CDF or Jenkins if we need some kind that people. I've serval Jenkins related talks at some conference or meetup last year. I hope I could speak more topics to my forks this year. My company (alauda.io) and other companies or communities (DevOpsDays) are very supportive. I hope I could show up in the KubeCon in China this year.

If I understand correctly, we don't discuss the details in this thread. But if everything is going well, then we might need to create a new organization which named like CDF. An official website might be necessary too. So, in my opinion, it will have lots of works are waiting for us. Right?

Anyway, I expect more and more good news about Jenkins. If there's anything I can do for the Jenkins community. Just say it.

Best regards,

Rick (Zhao Xiaojie)

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/5f689e24-719d-2e82-94fa-b24bb65f4ca9%40gmail.com.

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

--

https://github.com/LinuxSuRen

[nicolas de loof]

That's a great new imho. This is not just about getting Jenkins community find a legal status. This is about building a full ecosystem and get collaboration with many other tools and vendor in this area. I remember the CNCF announcement, which was a tiny thing, and became a fantastic ecosystem. I hope CDF will bring the same dynamic.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAMM7nTGq6xWQYXQCo_PrA6uibBG%3DVhMKwMEX0xKwMr%3D3mVcq9w%40mail.gmail.com.

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

--

Nicolas De Loof

[Carlos Sanchez]

Great news for the community!

Thanks KK

--

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/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[夏润泽]

Good News. As a user in China, I also hope that more and more Chinese users can use Jenkins and participate in the contribution.

[R. Tyler Croy]

(replies inline)

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019, Oliver Gond??a wrote:

> Those are interesting news. Are we expecting to partner with existing
> communities around existing CD projects as a part of CDF? Are some of them
> on board with this vision or do we expect they will join us provided this

> turns out to be the right way to go? My concern is the ???Continuous
> Delivery Foundation??? feels pretty general and while getting under the

> wings of Linux Foundation is an impressive recognition of what we have
> achieved, it would be unfortunate to make an impression of claiming the
> whole field without wider consensus.

Hiya Oliver! I'll answer this since I've also been working a bit behind the
scenes with Tracy and the Linux Foundation (LF) to move this forward.

LF has been reaching out to some other projects which are what I would consider
our brothers and sisters in the Continuous Delivery space. A few of them are
projects which many Jenkins users are already very familiar with, but since a
couple of those projects are waiting for Jenkins to take the lead here, they
have not publicly discussed or committed to the idea of the CDF.


I'll have to write a blog post at some point about our path thus far, but I
originally wanted a Jenkins Software Foundation, but it was actually others
outside of the Jenkins project that _suggested_ and wanted a more broad
umbrella to support this entire space.

Suffice it to say, Jenkins is leading the way here, but we will not be the only
ones at the party! :)



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

GPG Key ID: 0F2298A980EE31ACCA0A7825E5C92681BEF6CEA2

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:49 PM Rick <linux...@gmail.com> wrote:

This would be huge good news for Jenkins community I think. Especially for Jenkins China Community. I'm very looking forward to it. I think the CDF could provide us with a great opportunity to host more events or activities. I can image that CDF will help to bring more contributors and sponsors into the community.

Yeah, exactly, that's precisely one of the goals.

 

Second, I need to thank KK for giving me the support and delegation to running Jenkins Subscription WeChat Account. Now we almost have 1K subscribers. One article will be published per week. And I'm willing to take the initiative to help build an activity Jenkins Community in China. I'd love to the contact person in China for CDF or Jenkins if we need some kind that people. I've serval Jenkins related talks at some conference or meetup last year. I hope I could speak more topics to my forks this year. My company (alauda.io) and other companies or communities (DevOpsDays) are very supportive. I hope I could show up in the KubeCon in China this year.

Thank you for all that you've been doing with the Jenkins project. The CDF, especially as more projects will join, create more platform and message that we can speak.

If I understand correctly, we don't discuss the details in this thread. But if everything is going well, then we might need to create a new organization which named like CDF. An official website might be necessary too. So, in my opinion, it will have lots of works are waiting for us. Right?

Yes, as it gets closer to the reality a lot of work will happen through the Linux Foundation, who runs the CDF.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAMM7nTGq6xWQYXQCo_PrA6uibBG%3DVhMKwMEX0xKwMr%3D3mVcq9w%40mail.gmail.com.

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

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:26 AM nicolas de loof <nicolas...@gmail.com> wrote:

That's a great new imho. This is not just about getting Jenkins community find a legal status. This is about building a full ecosystem and get collaboration with many other tools and vendor in this area. I remember the CNCF announcement, which was a tiny thing, and became a fantastic ecosystem. I hope CDF will bring the same dynamic.

Right, that's the goal. My hope is that the broad term that is "Continuous Delivery" creates a big enough umbrella for enough projects and the communities to work together. Also, these OSS projects working better together is beneficial for user organizations, and that's how we hope to drive more participations.

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANMVJzmzZyFcBCh2oSQq_cAXjCYPDmdAme2t2LCEumoJfDPPtw%40mail.gmail.com.

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

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Liam Newman]

Hello everyone!

We'll be doing an online Q&A on this tomorrow:

January 23rd, 2019 - 10am PST (6pm UTC)

Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/165732888 

Here's a link to the Google calendar event

Please join us and bring any questions you might have. 

>> <mailto:jenkinsci-dev+unsub...@googlegroups.com>.

>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> 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

> <mailto:jenkinsci-dev+unsub...@googlegroups.com>.

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

Thanks everyone who came to the Q&A. The slides are available here & the recording is available here.

If you are coming to FOSDEM, be sure to let us hear your thoughts.

2019年1月22日(火) 11:29 Liam Newman <bitwi...@gmail.com>:

>> <mailto:jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com>.

>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4z%2BQzaBc1pDtciKXH%3DMhB3vUR%3DCShiFbwy__2W6eEH_EQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> 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

> <mailto:jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com>.

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/f1351ad3-6875-4854-bc8d-069f5814c421%40googlegroups.com.

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

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

In FOSDEM, we organized a BOF session in which we talked a bit more about the CDF among 20-40 people who gathered. The response was good.

Attached is the charter of the CDF. This is the terms in which the Jenkins project is considering to move under the CDF. From the page 7 and onward, there's a bunch of details that describe the structure of the CDF.

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. Again, if anyone has questions, concerns, and/or opinions, I'd love to hear those.

Now, putting my board hat on, I talked with the other board members (aka Tyler), and 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.

Please keep the conversation going.

2019年1月24日(木) 9:40 Kohsuke Kawaguchi <k...@kohsuke.org>:

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[R. Tyler Croy]

(replies inline)

On Fri, 08 Feb 2019, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:

> In FOSDEM, we organized a BOF session in which we talked a bit more about
> the CDF among 20-40 people who gathered. The response was good.
>
> Attached is the charter of the CDF

> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QwpyOLRh4o41Hh5GA0FvTB8iNEEW-I9_/view?usp=sharing>.

> This is the terms in which the Jenkins project is considering to move under
> the CDF. From the page 7 and onward, there's a bunch of details that
> describe the structure of the CDF.

This charter looks pretty much the same as what I originally looked at for a
"JSF" at the beginning of this process, so looks good to me! :)

> 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. Again, if anyone has questions, concerns, and/or opinions, I'd
> love to hear those.

THis is important, thanks for highlighting it Kohsuke. This also reflects my
understanding of the world under the CDF. I will add that the "oversight body
of each TOC project", will also need to be in conversation with the CDF to help
set our budget to appropriately meet our needs.

Fortunately, with the CDF structure, this means we'll finally have a _real_ and
dependable annual budget, I couldn't be more excited :D

> Now, putting my board hat on, I talked with the other board members (aka
> Tyler), and 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.

Looks great to me, please do comment and weight in!



Toodles