Marvin,
Thanks for the explanation - I understand now.
Here is the modified report.
--------------------
Mynewt
Mynewt is a real-time operating system for constrained embedded systems.
Mynewt has been incubating since 2015-10-20.
Three most important issues to address in the move towards graduation:
1. Produce a first Apache release of downloadable RTOS image with
support for multiple peripherals and network connectivity.
2. Develop a roadmap and release schedule for the Mynewt Operating System
3. Expand the community, increase dev list activity, and add new
committers/pmc members.
Any issues that the Incubator PMC (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to be
aware of?
Just started incubation, nothing specific to report at this time.
How has the community developed since the last report?
We are approximately 2 weeks into the incubation process.
1. Core infrastructure has been set up. Core contributors have completed
their ICLA’s. Apache accounts, mailing lists, JIRA, and website are in
place.
2. First drop of documentation is linked to the incubator website on AFS.
3. Participation on the @dev mailing list was seen with installation
queries
and troubleshooting questions from mentors and 1 new subscriber.
How has the project developed since the last report?
Early activity:
1. Initial code drop on Apache git repository for Mynewt RTOS for M4 and M3
architectures in debug environment
2. Initial code drop on Apache git repository for newt tool to build basic
RTOS images
3. Core infrastructure is set up
Date of last release:
No release yet.
When were the last committers or PMC members elected?
Initial list of committers have been on-boarded.
No new members added on top of the initial committer list.
Signed-off-by:
[ ](mynewt) Sterling Hughes
[ ](mynewt) Jim Jagielski
[ ](mynewt) Justin Mclean
[ ](mynewt) Greg Stein
[ ](mynewt) P. Taylor Goetz
Shepherd/Mentor notes:
> On Nov 3, 2015, at 2:27 PM, Marvin Humphrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Aditi,
>
> I think what Justin is getting at is that graduation from the
> Incubator is not related to the maturity of the technology, but rather
> the maturity of the community.
>
> Apache is largely technology-agnostic -- the Foundation, and the Board
> of Directors acting on the Foundation's behalf when they oversee our
> projects, do not set technical direction for the projects, beyond
> requiring that they adhere to various policies. And thus they
> Incubator PMC, when evaluating whether a podling should graduate from
> the Incubator and be recommended as a TLP, does not care about
> project-specific technical milestones.
>
> Take a look at this "Apache Project Maturity Model" to see the kinds
> of things that the are more relevant for graduation:
>
> https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html
>
> The Maturity Model is relatively new, but some podlings have started
> evaluating their progress against it as a step just prior to
> graduation, and that seems to be working out well.
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 9:19 AM, aditi hilbert <[email protected]> wrote:
>> It’s a good point. I wondered about this esp. after the discussion we had
>> yesterday about next steps. How about:
>>
>> “Add configuration subsystem and interface (API) to manage and monitor
>> embedded devices”
>>
>> thanks,
>> aditi
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 3, 2015, at 3:24 AM, Justin Mclean <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Looks good to me.
>>>
>>>> 2. Add support for additional micro controller architectures.
>>>
>>> Very minor. It’s a nice to have, but that's not really a requirement for
>>> graduation. Can we think of something else to replace it?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Justin
>>>
>>
