Hi - I think that the goals towards graduation section should be re-ordered.
> Three most important issues to address in the move towards graduation: > > 1. Make the second release which addresses most of the Jira Issues > opened since the last release > > 2. Work on documentation > > 3. Grow community > IMHO - The order should be: 1. Grow community. 2. Make a second release. 3. Work on documentation. If the community feels that the second release and documentation will increase the chances for growing the community then these are sub-goals. The first podling release already satisfies the Apache release requirement. Does this make sense? Having Francesco joining is already a very good sign of growth! Regards, Dave On Dec 30, 2013, at 7:27 AM, Huesken, Jens wrote: > Hi Francesco, > I like your proposal to send a draft version to dev@ before finally > submitting it to the wiki. > > @all: > On open point I see is that we should discuss who feels responsible for doing > the reports in future. WDYT? > > Regards, > Jens. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Montag, 30. Dezember 2013 14:44 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OLINGO] RE: January 2014 Incubator report timeline > > On 30/12/2013 14:31, Huesken, Jens wrote: >> Hi all, >> since the last three reports for Olingo were done in the same way I assumed >> that writing the report and informing the mailing list is ok for everyone. >> The deadline for the report is January 1st, so I propose that everyone who >> has feedback for the report speaks up before the deadline. >> If there is no feedback I assume that everyone is ok with the report (lazy >> consensus). > > Lazy consensus is generally fine for some aspects, but in case of a > podling that will eventually show it is "ASF-mature" enough for > graduation, I would encourage as much discussion as possible. > > Anyway, I would say that the report you've submitted is just fine and > that we can think to action starting from next report. > >> @Francesco: Thanks for pointing this out. Any proposal how we should do that >> for future reports? How do other projects deal with that? Maybe you have >> some more experience? > > In Cocoon and Syncope (especially the latter that have gone through > incubation in 2012, so recently enough) usually someone from PMC - which > is most of time the PMC chair - prepares a draft report and send it via > e-mail with a subject line like as "[DRAFT] Report Apache XXX January > 2014", leaving some time (usual 72 hours are fine) open for discussion. > If no one objects, the report is then submitted. > Naturally, discussion can actually modify the text of the report being sent. > > Holding such discussion at dev@ will help matching requirements > expressed by [1] and finally speed up the incubation process. > > HTH > Regards. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Montag, 30. Dezember 2013 11:26 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OLINGO] RE: January 2014 Incubator report timeline >> >> On 30/12/2013 11:21, Huesken, Jens wrote: >>> Hi, >>> the report for Apache Olingo is ready and can be accessed via the wiki. >>> >>> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/January2014 >> Hi all, >> aren't we supposed to discuss and approve the report before (see [1])? >> >> Regards. >> >> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html#Incubator+ASF+Board+Reports > > -- > Francesco Chicchiriccò > > Tirasa - Open Source Excellence > http://www.tirasa.net/ > > ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member > http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/ >
