On 2016-10-01 03:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
It's optional, u need 3 +1 binding votes for a release to pass; so u r good to
close the vote and finalize the release
The 72h minimum is not optional and there was no reason to rush the vote.
For sure 4 +1 binding votes are enough.
But a later -1 vote concerning for example legal issues should still be
considered blocking until resolved.
However in this case I don't think there was anything to worry, certainly not
after the +1 from Justin. So no harm done.
However for next time we should again honour the 72h minimum time.
Thanks, Ate
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 30, 2016, at 9:31 PM, Steve Blackmon <sblack...@apache.org> wrote:
Will do. I was leaving vote open for the full 72 hour duration. Is that
optional once a quorum to release is reached?
On Sep 30, 2016 6:20 PM, "Suneel Marthi" <smar...@apache.org> wrote:
@Steve I see 3 +1 binding iPMC votes for 0.3-incubating release, u may want to
close the vote and finalize the release.
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:30 PM, sblackmon <sblack...@apache.org> wrote:
Thanks Suneel!
One key point from the original thread was the need to have a shared vision of
what improvements would position the project well for community and user growth
over the short and medium term.
I’ve begun adding issues in line with the themes I mentioned and associating
them to the releases labelled 0.4 - 0.6 and intend to come back to the list
with some proposals shortly.
One thing you could help with immediately is to validate our 0.3-incubating
release and contribute an IPMC vote over on general.
On September 29, 2016 at 5:46:43 PM, Suneel Marthi (smar...@apache.org) wrote:
Hi Ate and Steve,
I will be glad to contribute code too and be more involved in keeping the
project moving. If u could point me to jiras I could tackle I'll get
started on that.
Suneel
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote:
Hi Steve, community, silent followers,
In general the proposal and suggestions from Steve are all good steps
forward.
But I'm for now top posting and forking that discussion to try address
everyone
in the community directly, because I think there are other and more
critical
actions needed to make clear to the Incubator PMC that cancelling of this
project retirement will not end up to be just a temporary pause.
The first and highest priority action should be getting more and diverse
involvement and active participation from the community.
The steps suggested by Steve are definitely helpful and needed as well.
But it just as well might end up remaining a one man's task list...
Instead, we need to get more active input and suggestions/questions from
others
in the community, like Joey, our new mentor Suneel, and hopefully as well
from
the W3C ActivityStream 2.0 working group people, like Benjamin Young.
And we need not just 'talk' feedback, but actual interest and participation
with concrete contributions.
(Suneel: I know you signed up just to mentor, which of course also is
needed)
We need to see and show serious promise for growth of the project
community to
the IPMC, and in a reasonable short time frame (a few months at most).
Without that I think the changes of getting this project back on its feet
will
remain unrealistic, and then better be stopped.
This also was indicated by the request from John Ament (the Incubator
Chair), to
switch back to monthly reporting for the coming 3 months, so the IPMC can
monitor the progress and chances for success. And if not, probably will
decide
(or at least vote) for a final retirement after all.
I agree with John this make perfectly sense, and I'll update the reporting
schedule for Streams shortly to make it so.
Meaning: a next Incubator board report will need to be delivered monthly
for
at least the coming 3 months.
We better make sure there is positive news to report :-)
I also cc'ed Benjamin Young (who AFAIK hasn't subscribed to this list)
to see what ideas he has and what concrete actions can take in getting the
W3C
ActivityStreams 2.0 people involved as well.
And I'm explicitly calling out to the mostly silent community, including
the
other committers, to speak up and let us know what you might be able to do
for
the project *now*: ideas, feedback, testing, maybe even code contributions?
Kind regards, Ate
On 2016-09-28 22:00, sblackmon wrote:
All,
Joey brought this up over the weekend and I think a discussion is overdue
on the topic.
Encouraging community growth and performing regular releases are on our
list of graduation criteria.
A few easy behaviors we can adopt to take to make progress on these goals:
- planning release versions around one or two significant improvements
- setting target dates to kick off upcoming releases
- prioritizing our backlog after each release
- discussing project and community milestones openly on the list
- organizing JIRA so that all contributors (especially new) can decide
where it’s most important to focus their efforts
I think to get things moving again and demonstrate we are capable of
consistent progress, we should aim to perform a release once per month
around the end of the month.
As for what to focus on, I think it’s time to discuss adopting Activity
Streams 2.0, figure out what form that transition would take, and get
started down that path. Working implementations demonstrate the
suitability of the standard and drive it’s adoption, and the prospects of
this project are closely tied to those of the standard. Separate DISCUSS
coming on this topic.
Also important for the ‘reboot’ theme, we should delete any modules we
aren’t going to maintain, and bring all modules we are going to maintain up
to acceptable standards - exactly what that means is an open question but
broadly they should have documentation, code comments, and tests at the
level of a typical module in a typical TLP.
Expanding the examples to demonstrate how to use streams providers and
processors within various execution engines and fixing any bugs that have
been reported is desirable as well. Adding at least one new example per
release is a good target for now.
I have created some future versions with target release dates in JIRA and
invite all committers to associate existing or new issues with those
releases, or anyone who can’t modify JIRA to summarize their thoughts and
share with the list and I will incorporate those ideas into JIRA. This
should be the default reference for anyone looking for a way to help - look
at issues associated with the next few releases and the top of the backlog
and pick something that appeals and is in line with your experience.
Anything else that should be a top priority for the rest of the year? Or
other ideas on improving planning and coordination?
Steve
On September 24, 2016 at 1:01:02 PM, apache (sblack...@apache.org) wrote:
- This has already come up, but maybe ActivityStreams 2.0 support would
broaden the community and motivate more work. It's also a concrete
goal to work toward so people would know where they can start.
- Steve and I did a little work here a few months ago, but the JIRA could
reflect the priorities better and I think keep the community working in a
common direction.
