[Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development
xdg at xdg.me
Mon Oct 3 20:37:40 GMT 2016
Hello, DBIC community.
I apologize in advance for the length of this email, but I urge everyone
that uses DBIC to read it fully as it relates to the future of this
For those who don't know me, I'm DAGOLDEN on CPAN and I've joined this list
in my capacity as a PAUSE <http://pause.perl.org>  administrator.
For those on the list who aren't familiar with CPAN administration, PAUSE
is the service that authors use to upload modules to CPAN. Among other
functions, it generates the index that maps modules names to downloadable
tarballs – e.g. "DBIx::Class" to "RIBASUSHI/DBIx-Class-0.082840.tar.gz" on
a CPAN mirror.
PAUSE also maintains a permissions model
<http://perladvent.org/2013/2013-12-08.html>  for each module namespace
with two levels: "primary maintainer" (also called "first come") and
"co-maintainer" (aka "co-maint"). Primary maintainers can grant and revoke
co-maint permissions. Both levels can upload tarballs to PAUSE, triggering
an update to the index.
Over the past several weeks, I've been the PAUSE administrator selected to
mediate a dispute over future disposition of primary permissions for the
The dispute was triggered by Peter Rabbitson's "Traffic pattern changes
 email to this list on September 6, in which he said:
*I have also firmly selected who will be getting the DBIx::Class *
*namespace first-come, the transfer of which will also happen *
*somewhere around the end of September.*
Because the identity of the new primary maintainer was neither disclosed
nor discussed with Matt Trout (the founder of the DBIC project, current
co-maintainer and also PAUSE administrator) or other co-maintainers,
several private conversations between ensued between Matt, Peter and others
about this declaration.
On September 15, Peter notified PAUSE administrators via the
modules at perl.org mailing list of an "Upcoming PAUSE permissions dispute"
Separately, Matt notified PAUSE administrators privately with his own
concerns about a possible dispute (his email was later disclosed and I'll
link to it later).
On September 21, I privately emailed all DBIC maintainers (CPAN authors
ABRAXXA, ARODLAND, FREW, ILMARI, JROBINSON, MSTROUT, and RIBASUSHI) on
behalf of PAUSE administrators with our collective view of how this dispute
would be best resolved. Peter asked that any discussion be public, so I
reposted it to the modules at perl.org mailing list as "Message from PAUSE
Admins to DBIx::Class maintainers [resend]"
I urge everyone to read that thread in full as well. For reference, it
includes a copy
<http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.modules/2016/10/msg96178.html>  of
Matt's previously private email to PAUSE administrators.
Importantly, the thread summarizes PAUSE administrators' position on the
dispute, which I repost verbatim here:
*(1) Given the importance of DBIC to the broader Perl community (i.e. way*
<http://neilb.org/2015/04/20/river-of-cpan.html>>), we’d like to*
*see a more open discussion between existing maintainers about what happens*
*next in terms of DBIC leadership and control of primary permissions.*
*(2) The best outcome from our perspective would be for a successor to be*
*decided by consensus of existing maintainers.*
*(3) Given a dispute among maintainers, the only outcome that is absolutely*
*unacceptable to PAUSE admins would be a unilateral permissions transfer*
*(4) We really hope the DBIC maintainers and/or community can resolve this*
In the ensuing discussion, Peter disclosed additional details about his
plans for the future of DBIC in the "Future plans" section of this email
*I am still planning to wrap up the remaining pieces, including some *
*unannounced initiatives to get the project into the best shape possible *
*to survive its leaderlessness.*
*I am still planning to remove all co-maint perms and handover the *
*first-come to a yet-undisclosed person. Given no clear line of *
*succession, and the incredibly high stakes wrt compatibility, the only *
*responsible thing to do is to select a single spot of responsibility and *
*provide all possible support and infrastructure for a proper *
In another email
Peter suggested raising these issues explicitly on the DBIC mailing list:
*As suggested in an earlier email: the PAUSE admins (as the only *
*legitimate concerned party at this point) would likely benefit having *
*this question asked in a wider forum ( the DBIC mailing list and/or *
*other channels ). Essentially someone has to trigger a "vote of no *
*confidence", otherwise this entire exchange is just a time consuming
On behalf of the PAUSE administrators, we would therefore like to invite
Peter to describe in more detail his plans for a "project freeze" and the
role he envisions for a successor maintainer. We invite Matt, other
co-maintainers, and the DBIC community at large to add their thoughts about
the specifics of the plan or about the situation in general.
Given public and private discussions to date, we believe the DBIC community
should consider questions such as:
- How should the future governance of the DBIC project be decided?
- Who should or shouldn't be involved in future governance?
- Should the project be "frozen" or should development continue?
- If "frozen", what specifically would a "freeze" entail? Would there be
- If not "frozen", what principles should govern development? (Cathedral
vs Bazaar <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar>
 and/or New Jersey Style vs MIT Style
We believe these discussions, if had openly, honestly and constructively,
will lead to the best resolution of this dispute for the DBIC community.
Thank you for reading this far, and I look forward to reading the
community's views on these matters.
David Golden, PAUSE Administrator
David Golden <xdg at xdg.me> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the DBIx-Class