Hi folks, Johan will be submitting this, but I've drafted the following for our quarterly report.
Note in particular the questions I've posed in the last paragraph. Happy to drop that last paragraph if we'd rather have a preliminary discussion here first, but are there any opinions on the idea? Thx Dan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ## Description: The mission of Isis is the creation and maintenance of software related to Framework for rapidly developing domain-driven apps in Java ## Issues: There are no issues requiring board attention at this time. ## Membership Data: Apache Isis was founded 2012-10-17 (9 years ago) There are currently 15 committers and 15 PMC members in this project. The Committer-to-PMC ratio is 1:1. Community changes, past quarter: - No new PMC members. Last addition was Jörg Rade on 2020-04-12. - No new committers. Last addition was Jörg Rade on 2020-03-23. ## Project Activity: There continues to be substantial development work on v2.0, with the framework being "re-platformed" to run on top of Spring Boot. We had hoped to deliver a final M7 milestone before the end of the year, but missed that target. We fully expect that to be delivered this quarter. The M7 release includes some quite deep simplifications and refinements of the programming model that we are looking forward to using ourselves! After that the plan remains to move to RCs for final bugfixes. We then look to the project rename, mentioned in previous reports. ## Community Health: This is a mature project. The framework is generally stable. While there is little activity on the mailing lists, there is frequent activity on the Slack channel (more on this topic below). We do recognise that the community engagement is below a sustainable level, but have high hopes for 2.0 (with its switch to defacto standards such as Spring Boot and JPA) to reinvigorate the community; if we decide to rename the project then this will be more like relaunch. We have now started submitting talks to a number of conferences to start the "marketing" effort later this year. ## Comments requested: While we've been enjoying using Slack as an additional means to support the community, we recently discovered that Slack is now only "invite only", thus likely to be a barrier to participation. We note that the Camel project provides a link to Zulip (https://camel.zulipchat.com/login/). We do understand that the mailing list must remain the official communication channel, but is there anything in the ASF byelaws to prevent us from following Camel's lead? Separately, a number of committers and PMC members are no longer involved in the project... of the 15, there is a core of 4 who are still actively involved. We know that ASF doesn't support the notion of "emeritus" members. As we are considering a rename, would it even be worthwhile to archive the project and the kick off its successor as a new project in the incubator?
