Adopt wmi_exporter

[carlpett]

The maintainers of wmi_exporter (me and @martinlindhe) would like to propose adopting the wmi_exporter into prometheus-community.

At the same time, the project also should be renamed, to reflect that we are now not only using WMI as a datasource. Proposed new name is simply "windows_exporter", but open for suggestions.

[brian-brazil]

I support this, and am willing to be steward for this one as I'm already doing it unofficially.

[RichiH]

Sounds good to me

Sent by mobile; please excuse my brevity.

On Mon, May 27, 2019, 15:34 Brian Brazil notifications@github.com wrote:

I support this, and am willing to be steward for this one as I'm already doing it unofficially.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/prometheus-community/prometheus-community/issues/7?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAFYIIYTGRYAOYCHWRWAADTPXPPN7A5CNFSM4HP35Q4KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWJ2HLY#issuecomment-496214959, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFYIIYSXHGFNGGJD4MHKY3PXPPN7ANCNFSM4HP35Q4A .

[SuperQ]

:+1:

[SuperQ]

When should we do the transfer of the exporter to this group? Also, I recall there was an idea to rename this to windows_exporter, since the scope has expanded beyond just being a bridge to WMI.

[carlpett]

From my understanding there is still some unclarity on how prometheus-community would work? We haven't closed the discussions in #7 #8 #9, at least, which I had assumed was required before starting transfers?

[SuperQ]

We had a discussion at one of the previous developer summits and decided that it was OK to continue running the project under the existing Prometheus governance rules. Basically we need a volunteer from Prometheus Team to "sponsor" a project, but additional maintainers can be granted using our lazy consensus procedure.

Additional documentation is meant to expand things beyond those rules, but there's nothing stopping us from moving forward.

[SuperQ]

Ping @carlpett, we're now moving projects over if you're still interested in doing this. I can create a new management team under the prometheus-community org, and you can continue to be a maintainer and invite others to be maintainers.

We just need to select a Prometheus maintainer as the "steward". @brian-brazil or @RichiH, do either of you want to take this one?

[carlpett]

Yes, I think it would be very good to move it over! I actually opened an RFC issue in the exporter repo just this morning, so I hope we can get some input there on both the name but also what interesting dependencies have built up over the years on the specific name/url. (edit: oh, now I see you had already found that and commented on it :) ) I think the rename+move combination has a potential to be a bit confusing if we don't do it in more or less one operation. Github generates redirects when a repo is renamed or moved, but if we stop in either intermediate stage (moved but not renamed or vice versa) we'll have to go through whatever pains twice, which seems unnecessary.

Thoughts? I can check with Github if they could help do a rename+transfer in a single operation.

[SuperQ]

I'm not sure you can rename and move in the same step.

[SuperQ]

wmi_exporter is now moved, now called windows_exporter.