On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On May 9, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Luciano Resende wrote: > >> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for the report, Wink, and for the review, Dave! >>> >>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >>>> From activity it looks like this project should have graduated into a TLP >>>> a year >>>> ago. It looks like a mature and well developed project. I don't understand >>>> why >>>> they think that they should become a subproject of Geronimo or Tuscany. >>>> They are a mature and useful tool. It's time for this bird to fly on its >>>> own >>>> wings. They are an example of a small, viable community that contributes >>>> to more than one other community. Podling Namesearch and graduation >>>> should be next. >>> >>> Wink, any thoughts on this? >>> >>> BR, >>> >>> Jukka Zitting >>> >> >> +1, This is my opinion as well, but we started considering other >> options mainly because of some feedback we got on the last discussion >> on the Wink mailing list (see summary on February board report). >> >> If the IPMC thinks otherwise and would be ok with the Wink project >> graduation based on "a small, viable community that contributes to >> more than one other community" I'm more then happy to continue the >> Graduation process. > > IIRC, there was one email that raised a concern about the diversity of the > community. I don't think there was any subsequent discussion (for or against > this concern). > > Actually, looks like this was the latest word on the subject: > > On Feb 2, 2012, at 8:49 AM, ant elder wrote: > >> "...talks had halted as one member has not agreed to proceed with >> graduation..." thats a little harsh, I just questioned the level of >> activity and said it would be an easier decision if Wink was more >> active. >
I'll comment as thats an email from me thats been brought up - I made that comment in relation to a graduation discussion on wink-dev in January: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-wink-dev/201201.mbox/%3CCAJO+Ubugk5kvdBq=c7iYKatDo14Ha3AGN=rts70xoxcaebw...@mail.gmail.com%3E In the six month period up till then there had been a total of six commits from two committers: http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?from=20110713&to=20120113&path=%2Fincubator%2Fwink. >From my watching of the project over that time there had also been a number of emails from users, JIRAs, and patches gone ignored. So that didn't seem to me like enough activity to graduate. Note that I'm not a mentor of Wink but I watch the poddling as we use it in Tuscany. Its four months later now and things have improved a little, looking at the commit situation since then shows there has been more commits (34) but still from just two committers and both those work for the same employer, i don't know if they commit as part of their day job but AIUI Wink is used in their production apps, so the diversity is not great. The two active committers only became committers after most of the code was written and the others moved on so probably don't have an in depth knowledge of the code, they're doing a release now so thats good, but there isn't new development going on and most changes are minor tweaks and applying the odd user patch. So strictly speaking this doesn't seem to meet the documented Incubator graduation requirements. I don't really see the problem with just letting Wink keep incubating till they attract more active committers, but if theres no appetite for that then I expect a 4 or 5 person PMC could be got together from all the Incubator PMC members and mentors subscribed to the dev list which could make a viable TLP PMC. ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
