toc
toc copied to clipboard
cncf
Health of Curiefense incubation project
Is Curiefense being actively maintained?
I was looking for a new release that includes HTTP2 Rapid Reset fixed versions of their upstream proxy dependencies but see there have not been any recent published releases. I ended up needing to build my own but this really got me curious about the project.
What I've found so far.
Code updates seem to have stalled...
- No new merged PR's since July
- No new commits to the main repo since July
Slack channels have gone dark
I've been unable to get a response from any of the top contributors.
According to the last annual review it was still 100% maintained by Reblaze and they were hopeful that adoption would pick up and then they could work on diversifying contributions. No review was submitted for this year which could be because the review process is being deprecated.
Adding some metrics from https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health-table?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Curiefense
PRs: Number of PRs merged in the last 3 months: 0 Issues: Number of issues closed in the last 6 months: 0
These metrics do show commits over the last 3 month but they appear to be from a fork that is auto synced and not from any actual projects at https://github.com/curiefense.
cc CODEOWNERS @tzuryby @xavier-rbz @phil777 @yitzchake @Aviv-Galmidi @flaper87 @jdorfman
Based on the responses in the issue with the project, this should likely move to archive due to inactivity.
Let's move this to a vote for Archive for the TOC @amye . Do we need a separate issue/PR to conduct the vote or will this one suffice?
reference comment from former Project maintainer: https://github.com/curiefense/curiefense/issues/1259#issuecomment-1920812155
I have marked this as 'ready for TOC', when we have a fully seated TOC and projects are moving to a vote, this will be in the queues.
We (Control Plane Corporation) are willing to provide engineering resources to begin maintaining the repo and garner additional participation from others in the CNCF community. Is it possible for us to do this?
Thank you for consideration!
I would say yes it is very possible. Couple thoughts (@jeefy if you could chime in on the details for how to go about the maintainer changes)
- we'd need to identify new maintainers to add. We'll need to have demonstrated effort/attempts to reincorporate the previous maintainers or receive notice of their divestment and withdrawal from the project. if notice is not received in a specified, realistic timeframe, we should annotate those attempts that show reasonable attempt before removal. this should be done transparently and documented. (we have this from 1 maintainer already and therefore referencing that previous comment should be done upon removal)
- project governance will need updated.
- project roadmap will need re-evaluated and updated
@caniszczyk and @thelinuxfoundation should have been added to their Org during project onboarding as a way to break glass in case this is necessary. That would be how we could add additional maintainers.
@tzuryby has been active as of a few weeks ago so hopefully another signal flare will get some eyeballs on this.
@tzuryby - given the interest by @emaildanwilson and Control Plane Corporation, do you have a defined path for onboarding new maintainers to the project? I'd like to see this project return or embark on the path to health with a full roadmap in the next 4 months.
@TheFoxAtWork we'd be happy to help bring the project back to health and reincorporate previous maintainers. Our team members that can start working on this are @jvassev @MajidAbuRmila @Cuppojoe and myself. I'll work on PR's for the governance and roadmap updates but we still don't have any way to get changes reviewed/merged. Does it make sense during the transition to make a few CNCF TOC members maintainers of the project? Thank you!
@emaildanwilson - I appreciate the support for the project. The TOC is going to discuss this internally to determine a best path forward. Archival is still part of that discussion but would not prevent Control Plane from forking the project and beginning development until we (TOC) reach consensus on direction. This would provide the most flexibility for any organization looking to pick up the project, regardless if it is determined that archival is a good path or not.
Thank you, @jvassev @MajidAbuRmila @Cuppojoe @emaildanwilson, for your generous offer to take over the leadership and development of the Curiefense project.
One of the considerations that has been raised in the past, regarding the potential transition of project ownership, is the concern over the name, brand, and trademark associations, as well as the overall vision and direction for the project. This is particularly relevant in the event that some of the previous committers and contributors decide to rejoin the project at a later stage. To address this concern and ensure a clean and organized transition, the most appropriate approach would be to mark the current Curiefense project [1][2] as archived.
By officially archiving the existing project, we can clearly communicate to the end-users and the broader community that they should no longer rely on the current project or expect further updates or support. Additionally, archiving the project would effectively remove its current "Incubation" status within the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) ecosystem.
Once the archiving process is complete, you and your team would be free to embark on a fresh start with a new project. This would involve forking the existing Curiefense repository and creating a new, independent project with its own branding, vision, and governance structure. Furthermore, you would be able to file a new sandbox application with the CNCF, allowing your project to go through the established process for incubation and potential graduation as a CNCF project in its own right.
By taking this approach, you would have the freedom to shape the project according to your collective vision, without the potential constraints or obligations associated with the existing Curiefense project and its history. At the same time, this would provide a clear delineation between the previous project and your new endeavor, ensuring transparency and avoiding any confusion or conflicts down the line.
We understand that this may involve additional work and effort on your part, but we believe it is the most prudent and responsible way to proceed, ensuring a smooth transition and setting your project up for long-term success.
[1] https://www.cncf.io/archived-projects/ [2] https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/main/process/archiving.md
Following up on @dims previous response, the TOC has decided to move this to a vote for archival.
/vote
Vote created
@mrbobbytables has called for a vote on Health of Curiefense incubation project (#1192).
The members of the following teams have binding votes:
| Team |
|---|
| @cncf/cncf-toc |
Non-binding votes are also appreciated as a sign of support!
How to vote
You can cast your vote by reacting to this comment. The following reactions are supported:
| In favor | Against | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 👎 | 👀 |
Please note that voting for multiple options is not allowed and those votes won't be counted.
The vote will be open for 5months 29days 19h 12m. It will pass if at least 66% of the users with binding votes vote In favor 👍. Once it's closed, results will be published here as a new comment.
![git-vote[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/206179?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
Vote status
So far 36.36% of the users with binding vote are in favor (passing threshold: 66%).
Summary
| In favor | Against | Abstain | Not voted |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
Binding votes (4)
| User | Vote | Timestamp |
|---|---|---|
| nikhita | In favor | 2024-06-25 6:03:16.0 +00:00:00 |
| angellk | In favor | 2024-06-25 0:52:10.0 +00:00:00 |
| dims | In favor | 2024-06-25 1:10:09.0 +00:00:00 |
| TheFoxAtWork | In favor | 2024-06-25 0:36:17.0 +00:00:00 |
| @rochaporto | Pending | |
| @mauilion | Pending | |
| @linsun | Pending | |
| @dzolotusky | Pending | |
| @kevin-wangzefeng | Pending | |
| @cathyhongzhang | Pending | |
| @kgamanji | Pending |
Vote closed
The vote passed! 🎉
72.73% of the users with binding vote were in favor (passing threshold: 66%).
Summary
| In favor | Against | Abstain | Not voted |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
Binding votes (8)
| User | Vote | Timestamp |
|---|---|---|
| @TheFoxAtWork | In favor | 2024-06-25 0:36:17.0 +00:00:00 |
| @rochaporto | In favor | 2024-06-27 16:59:50.0 +00:00:00 |
| @kevin-wangzefeng | In favor | 2024-06-26 3:45:21.0 +00:00:00 |
| @kgamanji | In favor | 2024-06-26 8:38:01.0 +00:00:00 |
| @nikhita | In favor | 2024-06-25 6:03:16.0 +00:00:00 |
| @dims | In favor | 2024-06-25 1:10:09.0 +00:00:00 |
| @linsun | In favor | 2024-06-25 22:37:00.0 +00:00:00 |
| @angellk | In favor | 2024-06-25 0:52:10.0 +00:00:00 |
With the vote passing, we've started the archive process here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/1361 Will go ahead and close this out and use that for tracking status :+1: