On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Greg Chase <gch...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> The community is of course thinking about it. That is the point of the >> Incubator program. >> >> However, I imagine we will be asking about graduation after the release of >> Geode 1.0 GA. >> > > Getting the mechanics of releases right and showing the IPMC that the > project understand how to do that is important. What I particularly liked > about this projects 2nd (M2) release was not just the +1 votes, but the > qualifications that accompanied those votes ("I checked the sigs", "I built > & ran the tests" etc) - I see that and it gives me confidence that this is > not a rubber stamping exercise, but the project members are exercising > their responsibilities with care & attention. In terms of meeting the > graduation criteria, geode will almost certainly have ticked that box in > terms of graduation with another release. Obviously users place great > importance and judge releases on labels such as "milestone", "beta" or "GA" > etc - but from an ASF perspective these are not relevant as "quality of > release" is judged on different criteria (licensing, process etc) and by > those criteria theres no difference between an M1 or a GA release. From > that perspective, my opinion is that geode is doing a great job and will > probably have nailed it with the upcoming M3 release. > > From what I see, geode has got all its legal ducks in a row (code grants, > source headers, license compatibility) and so the last and main graduation > criteria it needs to meet relate to community[1]. IMO this is the most > difficult (and important) of all the criteria, its also more subjective to > judge and from a project that entered from a single company the hardest to > satisfy. From what I see on the mailing list, this is a great community and > meets the "openness" criteria - its a welcoming place, people > discuss/disagree and come to a consensus in the way that the ASF expects. > The one question I have is "are all the discussions/decisions being brought > to this mailing list?" - as an observer, it looks to me like that is > happening - but only the project members can confirm that. If the answer is > yes, then thats another tick in the box. New committers have been voted in > and (AIUI) this is not just from Pivotal, but other "legally independent" > people, so growing the community is also met. Lastly is the "diversity" > question and this is probably the hardest to give a definitive answer. The > IPMC seems to have moved from the prescriptive criteria laid out in the > link below to a more judgement based approach and it would be a good idea > to discuss this with your mentors and/or sound out the wider IPMC on how > geode can meet this criteria. Obviously the more new independent people you > recruit, the better for this - but would be good to know how near or far > you are from meeting that. The one thing I would say is that alot of people > were put on the initial incubator proposal (70+ I believe) and I would > recommend reviewing that when you decide to go for graduation and removing > anyone who has not been active (easy enough to vote them back in later if > they start contributing) as I'm sure that will help with the balance as > well as reflecting reality.
Niall, thanks a million for your extremely thoughtful reply. With my mentor hat on, I wholeheartedly agree with all the points you made. I really do think the community is on a trajectory to graduate relatively soon. Given that, now would be a perfect time to start bringing up concerns and suggestions along the lines of what you've mentioned in your last sentence. Thanks, Roman.