Parallelism and eventual consistency at work. ;) (See my previous response)
I agree with Josh’s comments, especially wrt mentioning mentor changes. In general, I’d say try to be as detailed as possible, avoid statements that will raise questions, and focus on what’s important to the IPMC (i.e. community growth, making releases, etc.). The updated report looks better. -Taylor > On Jan 4, 2017, at 4:27 PM, Edward Capriolo <[email protected]> wrote: > > "What are the tasks that aren’t accounted for? And what tasks are pending > release? The above statements raise questions." > > That breakdown was from Jira, I realize that the report only counts > "Issues" not "tasks" and some other types. So the 0 was very misleading > because things i did like fix javadoc and add rat plugin were not counted. > > Please see the updated report in my last email. > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:21 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Comments in-line below. >> >> -Taylor >> >>> On Jan 4, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Edward Capriolo <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> I completed the board report, I wanted to get the RC voting going before >>> doing the report. If anyone has any comments/ suggestions let me know. >>> >>> The report is due today (sorry if that puts a rush on anyone) >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Edward >>> >>> -------------------- >>> Gossip >>> >>> Gossip is a system to form peer-to-peer networks using the gossip >>> protocol. >>> >>> Gossip has been incubating since 2016-05. >>> >>> Three most important issues to address in the move towards graduation: >>> >>> 1. Establish an Apache website for Gossip that makes it easy for new >>> users and contributors to get started. >> >> Minor nit: Gossip already has a website, do you mean expanding? I do like >> the community-building aspect here though. >> >>> 2. Focus on large scale multi-node testing. >>> 3. Accrual Failure detection via ( >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-22) >> >> These are technical aspects that the IPMC likely doesn’t care too much >> about. The IPMC cares more about what the projects needs to do in order to >> graduate. As a mentor, I’d say the top two right now are: >> >> 1. Grow the community. >> 2. Make more frequents releases. >> >> >> >>> >>> Any issues that the Incubator PMC (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to be >>> aware of? >>> >>> No >>> >>> >>> How has the community developed since the last report? >>> >>> One contributer has been voted as a committer. >> >> Who is the committer and when were they added (I know, but it is helpful >> to include this information in the report)? >> >>> There are 13 watches 24 stars on github >>> >>> >>> How has the project developed since the last report? >>> >>> Issues: >>> Period Created Resolved >>> July 2016 6 3 >>> August 2016 3 3 >>> September 2016 2 5 >>> October 2016 7 5 >>> November 2016 2 4 >>> December 2016 0 0 >>> January 2017 1 1 >> >> I would just summarize for the current reporting period. E.g. "X/Y issues >> created/resolved in the current reporting period. X/Y in the previous >> period." >> >>> >>> *Note: We completed several Tasks related to our first release that are >> not >>> accounted for in this report. >>> We also have several features/issues that have been frozen waiting for >>> release >> >> What are the tasks that aren’t accounted for? And what tasks are pending >> release? The above statements raise questions. >> >>> >>> Date of last release: >>> >>> Currently in voting >>> >>> When were the last committers or PMC members elected? >>> >>> We added a committer during the last report cycle >>> >>> Signed-off-by: >>> >>> [X](Gossip) Edward Capriolo >>> [ ](Gossip) Josh Elser >>> [ ](Gossp) P. Taylor >>> Shepherd/Mentor notes: >> >>
