(changing subjects to avoid confusion in RocketMQ's discussion) I've been pretty explicit about my disdain in the past over the use of the Apache Project Maturity Model. The model describes an ideal world that all projects should strive for, but I would be surprised if many projects passed it.
Its unfair for us to put some stake in the ground expecting podlings to match up 100% on the questions. Many of the questions are subjective - is the code easy to discover? respond to bug reports in a timely manner? My take is that if a podling can answer 1 question per section correctly, and there's some validity to the answer (e.g. the IN section requires a polygraph test) then they're on their way. For instance, figuring out how to report a security issue around Apache Hadoop leads me to vendor websites first, the first apache.org match is on the second page. This creates violations in the CO, QU, and IN categories. John On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:30 PM Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:06 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > wrote: > > ...please understand that the Apache Maturity Model is something that > > helps the com dev team evaluate TLPs against. Its relevance to a > > graduating podling is extremely small... > > FWIW, I disagree...I think the maturity model is a great tool to help > discover areas that podlings might have neglected in their work > towards graduation. > > It's not THE single tool to evaluate TLP readiness, but I wouldn't > qualify its relevance as "extremely small". > > (John - maybe we agree on the core, but I just reread the model and love > it ;-) > > -Bertrand > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
