I think the community has done an excellent job in a number of key areas: 1) A dramatic improvement in available documentation on both internals // implementation as well as usability. While I would argue a substantial amount of work remains to be done on the latter, I think this is in a much better place than it was, and this will be critical for involving new members to the community. 2) Questions on the mailing list have been addressed readily and completely, and contributions have been both welcomed and encouraged. 3) Design discussions on significant changes have happened openly and in full view of the community. 4) The leaders of Apex have demonstrated humility and openness to new ideas, as well as a deep commitment to the principles governing Apache projects.
Thus, I am happy to vote +1 for graduation. I think the biggest focus needs to be on encouraging continued contribution and innovation with a core focus on usability. With that said, there’s still work to be done to ease the transition for newcomers, both contributors and users. I think it’s vital to continue to focus on ease of use, documentation, and a clear articulation of when Apex is the right tool for the job, and when it is not. No tool solves every problem. Thus, it is the role of this community as a whole to identify where Apex is a true leader with a unique value, and to help the broader big data community understand exactly where that is. If we achieve that, this project will be a success for many years to come, and not just a stepping stone to bigger and greater things. Cheers! -Ilya On 3/21/16, 4:10 PM, "Sandesh Hegde" <[email protected]> wrote: >All the metrics are reaching their apex. It is time for Apex to reach apex >by becoming a top level project. > >+1 for graduation. > >On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:26 AM Tushar Gosavi <[email protected]> >wrote: > >> I have observed that Apex community is growing and is following Apache way >> for development. Apex have done few quality releases successfully under >> Apache, and have integrated with other Apache projects. I think it is right >> time for Apex to become a top level project. >> >> + 1 for graduation. >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Pradeep Kumbhar <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > The discussion has come up at the right time and I believe that Apache >> Apex >> > is >> > ready for graduation as a TLP. The community has so far achieved great >> > milestones for features/integrations/fixes in Apex and going for TLP will >> > definitely speed up this growth rapidly. >> > >> > +1 for graduation >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Sandeep Deshmukh < >> > [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Apex is continuously growing in terms of user and developers, very >> > healthy >> > > growth in meetups across the globe and even had a successful University >> > > Program that included hands on training on Apex. >> > > >> > > Apex project is driven the Apache way and had smooth releases in the >> > past. >> > > >> > > +1 for graduation. >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > Sandeep >> > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Chinmay Kolhatkar < >> [email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > I have observed apex community to grow in both user and developer >> > space. >> > > > There is a wide variety of interests seen towards Apex from different >> > > > public platforms. >> > > > While user's and developer's interest has grown, apex community is >> > > > successfully dealing with all the request in right manner keeping >> > Apache >> > > > way in mind. >> > > > >> > > > +1 for graduation. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:41 AM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Apex has done very well during incubation, and I believe is ready >> to >> > > > > graduate. As a mentor, I will double check a few things, but I will >> > > > support >> > > > > the move to a TLP. >> > > > > >> > > > > -Taylor >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Mar 18, 2016, at 10:12 PM, Thomas Weise < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > We have addressed the items that were brought up during the >> initial >> > > > > > graduation discussion. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > The next step would be preparation of resolution and community >> > vote. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I think it is time for Apex to graduate and become a top level >> > > project. >> > > > > > What's your take? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > Thomas >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Sasha Parfenov < >> > > [email protected] >> > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> Following up an earlier question by Justin, I have verified that >> > all >> > > > > >> contributors to original docs repository are covered by ICLA. >> See >> > > > > comments >> > > > > >> in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-293 for >> > details. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Thanks, >> > > > > >> Sasha >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Chris Nauroth < >> > > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>> That's a good point. Maybe defer this until the last possible >> > > moment >> > > > > >>> before launching the IPMC vote. It's unlikely that you'll >> change >> > > the >> > > > > >>> committer or PMC roster during the vote, so that ought to >> reduce >> > > the >> > > > > >>> likelihood of double maintenance burden. >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> --Chris Nauroth >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>>> On 1/27/16, 11:36 PM, "Thomas Weise" <[email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> Chris, >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> Thanks, this is very helpful. I have created tickets for these >> > > items >> > > > > >> (hope >> > > > > >>>> you don't mind I made you the reporter): >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql >> > > > > >>>> =project%20%3D%20APEXCORE%20and%20labels%20%3D%20tlp >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> I was under the impression that the "Who We Are" page should >> be >> > > > setup >> > > > > at >> > > > > >>>> time of graduation to replace the information on the status >> > page. >> > > > But >> > > > > if >> > > > > >>>> it >> > > > > >>>> is best practice, we will do the double maintenance ;-) >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> Thanks again, >> > > > > >>>> Thomas >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Chris Nauroth < >> > > > > >> [email protected]> >> > > > > >>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>>> I agree that it's good to start the graduation discussion, >> > > pending >> > > > > >>>>> resolution of the documentation and release items mentioned >> by >> > > > other >> > > > > >>>>> mentors in the thread. I've been very impressed with this >> > > > > community's >> > > > > >>>>> level of activity and openness. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> I took a pass through the maturity model, and I'd like to >> call >> > > out >> > > > > the >> > > > > >>>>> items that may need additional work. I also have pointed out >> > > > > examples >> > > > > >>>>> of >> > > > > >>>>> how an existing project meets these criteria. (I used >> Hadoop, >> > > > > because >> > > > > >>>>> it's the project I know best.) >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> This exercise is best done as a self-evaluation by the most >> > > > involved >> > > > > >>>>> contributors, so it's possible that my perspective is >> > incomplete. >> > > > I >> > > > > >>>>> encourage more of the deeply involved community members to >> > review >> > > > the >> > > > > >>>>> maturity model in detail and draw their own conclusions. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> Also, I want to make sure it's clear that the maturity model >> is >> > > not >> > > > > an >> > > > > >>>>> absolute list of requirements. It is the community's choice >> on >> > > > > >> whether >> > > > > >>>>> or >> > > > > >>>>> not to address these points before a graduation proposal. >> > > However, >> > > > > >> some >> > > > > >>>>> IPMC members do use the maturity model as a checklist to >> gauge >> > > the >> > > > > >>>>> health >> > > > > >>>>> of a podling, so you'll bolster your case for graduation with >> > the >> > > > > >> wider >> > > > > >>>>> IPMC if you choose to take action on them. I also think all >> of >> > > > these >> > > > > >>>>> things are generally good for the project anyway, so it's not >> > > just >> > > > a >> > > > > >>>>> matter of satisfying bureaucratic demands. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> QU30 >> > > > > >>>>> The project provides a well-documented channel to report >> > security >> > > > > >>>>> issues, >> > > > > >>>>> along with a documented way of responding to them. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> I couldn't find a security vulnerability process documented >> at >> > > > > >>>>> apex.incubator.apache.org. Example: >> > > > > >>>>> http://hadoop.apache.org/mailing_lists.html >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> QU40 >> > > > > >>>>> The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility >> and >> > > > aims >> > > > > >> to >> > > > > >>>>> document any incompatible changes and provide tools and >> > > > documentation >> > > > > >> to >> > > > > >>>>> help users transition to new features. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> I couldn't find backwards-compatibility guidelines documented >> > at >> > > > > >>>>> apex.incubator.apache.org. Example: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.2/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Co >> > > > > >>>>> mp >> > > > > >>>>> atibility.html >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> CS10 >> > > > > >>>>> The project maintains a public list of its contributors who >> > have >> > > > > >>>>> decision >> > > > > >>>>> power -- the project's PMC (Project Management Committee) >> > > consists >> > > > of >> > > > > >>>>> those contributors. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> I couldn't find a "Who We Are" page at >> > apex.incubator.apache.org >> > > . >> > > > I >> > > > > >>>>> think >> > > > > >>>>> the information is accurate in the incubation status page >> > though. >> > > > > >>>>> Example: https://hadoop.apache.org/who.html >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> CS30 >> > > > > >>>>> Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when >> > > discussion >> > > > > is >> > > > > >>>>> not >> > > > > >>>>> sufficient. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> I couldn't find any statement of this. Example: >> > > > > >>>>> http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> --Chris Nauroth >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> On 1/25/16, 2:28 PM, "Sandesh Hegde" < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> +1 >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Code: CD50 >> > > > > >>>>>> Licenses and Copyright: LC50 >> > > > > >>>>>> Quality: QU50 >> > > > > >>>>>> Community: CO50 >> > > > > >>>>>> Independence: IN20 >> > > > > >>>>>> Releases: RE40 >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Thanks >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:09 PM Justin Mclean >> > > > > >>>>> <[email protected]> >> > > > > >>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> Hi, >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> It¹s not required but you might want to rate yourself with >> > this >> > > > [1] >> > > > > >>>>>>> like a >> > > > > >>>>>>> few other projects have done. [2][3] >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> Thanks, >> > > > > >>>>>>> Justin >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> 1. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.htm >> > > > > >>>>>>> l >> > > > > >>>>>>> 2. https://zest.apache.org/community/maturity.html >> > > > > >>>>>>> 3. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/groovy/blob/576b3c5d6a7022ac4a8df1ef118666456ce >> > > > > >>>>>>> 627fb/MATURITY.adoc >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > *regards,* >> > *~pradeep* >> > >> ________________________________________________________ The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The information transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer.
