Well as far as I can see it we could address most pretty quickly ... it's just 
the:

QU40

Is something we couldn't do immediately IMHO.

Chris

Am 07.03.19, 11:55 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <[email protected]>:

    Hi all,
    
    Having gone through Justin's link to the Apache maturity model [1] I guess 
we are on an extremely good path (Keep in mind this is not a maturity model for 
incubator projects, but all Apache projects)
    
    As far as I can see it, we get 100% of the points for most categories. 
There are however some, where we could improve with little effort:
    
    Quality
    - QU30: The project provides a well-documented, secure and private channel 
to report security issues, along with a documented way of responding to them.
    Apache usually has a channel for that [2] ... but we should add a page 
guiding people there.
    - QU40: The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and 
aims to document any incompatible changes and provide tools and documentation 
to help users transition to new features.
    Till now we have had changes of the API which were necessary but 
documented. I guess we should start stabilizing the API soon (Probably with a 
1.0.0 release) as soon as we have sorted out any possibly still existing API 
quirks
    
    Community:
    CO50 - The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as 
commit access or decision power is clearly documented and is the same for all 
contributors.
    We haven't officially discussed and documented this.
    
    Consensus Building:
    CS10 - The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have 
decision power -- the project's PMC (Project Management Committee) consists of 
those contributors.
    We should create and maintain such a list
    CS40 - In Apache projects, vetoes are only valid for code commits and are 
justified by a technical explanation, as per the Apache voting rules defined in 
CS30.
    This sort of contradicts our decision making guidelines at [3] but this 
table is based on the official Apache document [4] ... not quite sure what to 
do here ... will take it to the incubator list.
    
    In the end we should also add a document to our site that is similar to 
this [5]
    
    So ... with this ... would it be ok for us to vote on becoming a TLP or 
would we have to address everything first?
    
    Chris
    
    
    
    [1] 
https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html
    [2] http://www.apache.org/security/ 
    [3] http://plc4x.apache.org/developers/decisions.html
    [4] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DefaultProjectGuidelines 
    [5] 
https://github.com/apache/groovy/blob/576b3c5d6a7022ac4a8df1ef118666456ce627fb/MATURITY.adoc
    
    
    
    Am 04.03.19, 13:11 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <[email protected]>:
    
        Hi,
        
        thanks for the clarification.
        Then I'm fine with the doc : )
        
        Julian
        
        Am 04.03.19, 13:09 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" 
<[email protected]>:
        
            Hi Julian,
            
            I had an error in my table markup ... in a few minutes the 
footnotes should appear ... they're already in the adoc file, but not rendered.
            
            The document is from a point of view of the to become TLP (Cause 
otherwise there would have been more to mention ... "IPMC approval of Releases, 
Committers, PPMCs", ...
            
            And as soon as we are a TLP we no longer have a PPMC, but a PMC as 
the first "P" stands for "Podling".
            
            And I think you are misunderstanding the "Board" ... this is not 
the Incubator PMC (IPMC is just the short name of that). The Incubator itself 
is an Apache TLP and has it's PMC. 
            All TLPs report to the Board of the apache foundation. So our 
Incubator report goes into one big report of the Incubator project and that is 
then submitted as a big report to the Board.
            
            Chris
            
            
            
            Am 04.03.19, 12:00 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" 
<[email protected]>:
            
                Hi Chris,
                
                I read the document and I like it.
                A few findings / remarks:
                - is this document from the perspectiv of a incubating project 
or the (to become) TLP?
                - You always mention the PMC (should be (P)PMC for a podling)
                - For a podling the "Yes" is missing for board report approval
                - Do the 1) / 2) / 3) Stand for footnotes? If so, they are 
missing
                - I think there is a slight rendering issue with the "===" at 
the bottom left
                
                But these are just slight remarks (except for the podling vs 
TLP difference).
                
                Julian
                
                Am 04.03.19, 10:23 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" 
<[email protected]>:
                
                    Hi all,
                    
                    so I just added [1] (will take a few minutes to be live)
                    
                    However I haven't linked it in the menu yet as we haven't 
discussed it's content.
                    
                    In general it describes what we have been doing so far 
(That's why I took the liberty to select Consensus Approval for electing new 
Committers as we have been doing that)
                    
                    If you agree, then I would comment in the link and have it 
appear in the menu.
                    
                    Chris
                    
                    [1] http://plc4x.apache.org/developers/decision.html
                    
                    Am 04.03.19, 09:59 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" 
<[email protected]>:
                    
                        Hi all,
                        
                        I am currently creating a copy of the content on 
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DefaultProjectGuidelines
                        This is generally agreed upon by the IPMC and I a 
really good summary. I think we shouldn't do anything different.
                        
                        The main idea of copying instead of linking is: If in 
the future the linked document would change, we wouldn't notice that.
                        Then we could have people coming by referring to the 
new version and we haven't realized the changes. This way we could
                        Be made aware of changes, discuss them in the project 
and update our website.
                        
                        And 1 and 2 in my initial email weren't meant as 
alternatives. I think we should start with all "carried over PPMCs" being 
"PMCs" and "Comitters"
                        As we don't have any Committers that are not PPMCs this 
is sort of a trivial assumption ;-)
                        
                        The number 2 was just a suggestion, that the list of 
"Carried over PMCs" should be all the IPMCs that responded to the "You want to 
be carried over" Email.
                        
                        Chris
                        
                        
                        Am 04.03.19, 09:01 schrieb "Sebastian Rühl" 
<[email protected]>:
                        
                            Hi all,
                            
                            I agree to what Julian wrote and would also would 
vote to graduate.
                            Currently im a bit involved in private projects but 
during this march I should find some more time for the project again.
                            
                            Sebastian
                            
                            On 2019/03/01 20:35:03, Julian Feinauer 
<[email protected]> wrote: 
                            > Hi Chris,
                            > 
                            > first, thanks for bringing this up and doing all 
necessary tedious work.
                            > As this is the first incubating project I'm that 
heavily involved I'm lacking the exact feeling but I do not feel "unready".
                            > 
                            > I think we have achieved a lot since I joined the 
project and I'm very happy that we have such a strong core community.
                            > The last release also gave me confidence that we 
are able to do all these steps without you (not that we mind if you do it... ).
                            > The next (or the release after) will be performed 
by Tim and I feel confident that he will be able to do it easily with our 
documentation and some help from you or me.
                            > 
                            > Regarding the PPMC / PMC question... I would 
favor the second variant.
                            > We have a pretty big roster (on paper) with many 
people never seen on list (or anywhere else).
                            > So I think this could be a good chance to trim it 
down a bit and have it in more accordance with the people who really went 
active for the project.
                            > 
                            > Tl;dr; Let's do it : )
                            > 
                            > Julian
                            > 
                            > 
                            > Am 01.03.19, 13:49 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" 
<[email protected]>:
                            > 
                            >     Ok ... logo is uploaded ... so that should 
have been the last open task (Hopefully)
                            >     
                            >     Chris
                            >     
                            >     Am 01.03.19, 13:14 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" 
<[email protected]>:
                            >     
                            >         Hi Justin,
                            >         
                            >         well most of the red lines were actually 
false positives:
                            >         - We do have the image and link to the 
latest events on the page, however we include it with CSS
                            >         - Also was there a License link (Even if 
it was previously called "Apache License", I updated that in the menu and 
additionally let it output the "Apache" menu containing that link in the bottom 
navigation.
                            >         - I added a Trademark disclaimer in the 
bottom and added a TM to all Apache products mentioned on the start page.
                            >         - I'll add the logo ... if I find out how 
to do it ;-)
                            >         
                            >         And Justin, thanks for reporting this ... 
that's why we wanted you on board :thumbsup:
                            >         
                            >         Chris
                            >         
                            >         Am 01.03.19, 12:50 schrieb "Justin 
Mclean" <[email protected]>:
                            >         
                            >             Hi,
                            >             
                            >             > I'll work on the issues reported in 
[2] ... didn't know about that page … 
                            >             
                            >             Nothing major from what I can see but 
IMO the trademark notice in the footer need updating.
                            >             
                            >             Thanks,
                            >             Justin
                            >         
                            >         
                            >     
                            >     
                            > 
                            > 
                            
                        
                        
                    
                    
                
                
            
            
        
        
    
    

Reply via email to