Re: Graduation to TLP

[Donald Szeto]

Goal is the follow Apache's convention, so I think we will proceed with the
same list, excluding those who have requested to be excluded.

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:00 AM Luciano Resende 
wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> > minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> > PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> > almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
> these
> > 3 things:
> >
> > 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> >
>
> +1
>
>
> > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> initial
> > PMC?
> >
>
> Not sure about the goal of the question, but usually the PPMC will become
> the PMC unless you had done explicit committer versus ppmc votes or folks
> explicitly request to leave.
>
>
> > 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
> >
> > These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> > official graduation guide:
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
> >
> > In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> > trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
> >
> > I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs
> that
> > have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0
> will
> > contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> > out in previous releases by IPMC.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Donald
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Luciano Resende]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
> 3 things:
>
> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
>

+1


> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
> PMC?
>

Not sure about the goal of the question, but usually the PPMC will become
the PMC unless you had done explicit committer versus ppmc votes or folks
explicitly request to leave.


> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>
> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> official graduation guide:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
>
> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
>
> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> out in previous releases by IPMC.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Regards,
> Donald
>



-- 
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Matthew Tovbin]

Donald / All,

1. Absolutely. +1 graduation.
2. I would be happy to stay onboard and participate.
3. I propose Donald as a VP, unless he is not willing to take it or we have
another candidate in mind.

Cheers,

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
> 3 things:
>
> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
> PMC?
> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>
> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> official graduation guide:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
>
> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
>
> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> out in previous releases by IPMC.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Regards,
> Donald
>

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Donald Szeto]

It would be my pleasure to pick up TLP Chair responsibilities if nobody
objects.

Andrew, it would be really great and beneficial to the community if you
could stay on mentoring as PMC of the new TLP. Could you also help update
the project status page on the incubator site please?

I will reference other podling's graduation proposal and draft a board
resolution.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Andrew Purtell 
wrote:

> Donald would be great.
> Donald - please think about it.
>
> It was suggested privately to me that I stay on from mentoring as PMC. If
> you'll have me, I would be glad to help the new TLP as/if needed.
>
>
> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 6:07 PM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> >
> > This has been an informal poll and it looks like people are ready. I
> suggest we push for graduation after the next release, which will be done
> by someone not Donald, I think we have 2 volunteers? I think this will be a
> requirement since it’s been mentioned by several IPMC members.
> >
> > I’d like to think several people could be our candidate VP but since
> most of them are too busy and since we have another great candidate in
> Donald, I’d like to nominate him for TLP Chair/VP.
> >
> > I’d suggest we poll the committers and PMC members to see if any want
> out of the TLP, and otherwise go with the current list. We should try to
> add any committers that are ready before the graduation push, the more the
> better to the IPMC.
> >
> > We should put this in a proposal and get mentors feedback before
> applying since mentors are also IPMC members.
> >
> > Andy has mentioned several choices for convention that we should
> discuss, like our choice of git flow for commit process. He mentioned
> rotating Chair, which seems better suited to a larger project IMO but
> please chime in if you like the idea.
> >
> > If that is all clear we have to release, have a podling vote, then have
> the IPMC vote. If there is anything else regarding how we are run speak up
> now.
> >
> >
> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:01 AM, takako shimamoto 
> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to remain as committer and contribute my humble efforts to
> > the prosperity of the project.
> >
> >> I propose we stay with the current PMC and committer list unless
> someone wants to remove themselves.
> >
> > It may be good. In fact, most of committers carry out a task with
> > limited time. Anyway I hope the project will progress in a good
> > direction.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-09-06 3:43 GMT+09:00 Pat Ferrel :
> >> I personally don’t see much benefit in removing people unless they
> prove the exception. AFAIK this generally does not happen in ASF. I’m
> certainly not aware of the process except that it is easier in moving from
> podling to TLP.  You prove some worthiness and once that’s done, it’s done.
> A poll might just ask project members if they want to be removed. I have
> seen people ask to be removed from PMC and also “go emeritus” and those are
> cases of the individuals making the choice.
> >>
> >> So to settle the role call issue I propose we stay with the current PMC
> and committer list unless someone wants to remove themselves.
> >>
> >> As to maturity I agree with Donald that the checklist is heavy in our
> favor.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Simon Chan  wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 for graduation
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache
> veterans to
> >>> provide historical context to these processes.
> >>>
> >>> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
> >>>
> >>> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
> >>> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list
> in a
> >>> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
> >>> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
> >>>
> >>> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been
> replying
> >>> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
> >>>
> >>> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
> >>> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
> >>> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
> >>> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
> >>> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
> >>> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
> >>> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
> >>> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
> >>> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
> >>> main ASF doc)
> >>> - IN10, IN20
> >>>
> >>> Let me know what you think.
> >>>
>  On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel 
> wrote:
> 
>  The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Andrew Purtell]

Donald would be great. 
Donald - please think about it. 

It was suggested privately to me that I stay on from mentoring as PMC. If 
you'll have me, I would be glad to help the new TLP as/if needed. 


> On Sep 7, 2017, at 6:07 PM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> 
> This has been an informal poll and it looks like people are ready. I suggest 
> we push for graduation after the next release, which will be done by someone 
> not Donald, I think we have 2 volunteers? I think this will be a requirement 
> since it’s been mentioned by several IPMC members. 
> 
> I’d like to think several people could be our candidate VP but since most of 
> them are too busy and since we have another great candidate in Donald, I’d 
> like to nominate him for TLP Chair/VP.
> 
> I’d suggest we poll the committers and PMC members to see if any want out of 
> the TLP, and otherwise go with the current list. We should try to add any 
> committers that are ready before the graduation push, the more the better to 
> the IPMC.
> 
> We should put this in a proposal and get mentors feedback before applying 
> since mentors are also IPMC members.
> 
> Andy has mentioned several choices for convention that we should discuss, 
> like our choice of git flow for commit process. He mentioned rotating Chair, 
> which seems better suited to a larger project IMO but please chime in if you 
> like the idea.
> 
> If that is all clear we have to release, have a podling vote, then have the 
> IPMC vote. If there is anything else regarding how we are run speak up now.
> 
> 
> On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:01 AM, takako shimamoto  wrote:
> 
> I'd like to remain as committer and contribute my humble efforts to
> the prosperity of the project.
> 
>> I propose we stay with the current PMC and committer list unless someone 
>> wants to remove themselves.
> 
> It may be good. In fact, most of committers carry out a task with
> limited time. Anyway I hope the project will progress in a good
> direction.
> 
> 
> 
> 2017-09-06 3:43 GMT+09:00 Pat Ferrel :
>> I personally don’t see much benefit in removing people unless they prove the 
>> exception. AFAIK this generally does not happen in ASF. I’m certainly not 
>> aware of the process except that it is easier in moving from podling to TLP. 
>>  You prove some worthiness and once that’s done, it’s done. A poll might 
>> just ask project members if they want to be removed. I have seen people ask 
>> to be removed from PMC and also “go emeritus” and those are cases of the 
>> individuals making the choice.
>> 
>> So to settle the role call issue I propose we stay with the current PMC and 
>> committer list unless someone wants to remove themselves.
>> 
>> As to maturity I agree with Donald that the checklist is heavy in our favor.
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Simon Chan  wrote:
>> 
>> +1 for graduation
>> 
>>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
>>> provide historical context to these processes.
>>> 
>>> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
>>> 
>>> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
>>> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
>>> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
>>> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
>>> 
>>> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
>>> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
>>> 
>>> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
>>> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
>>> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
>>> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
>>> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
>>> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
>>> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
>>> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
>>> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
>>> main ASF doc)
>>> - IN10, IN20
>>> 
>>> Let me know what you think.
>>> 
 On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
 
 The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
 PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a
>>> valuable
 role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
 list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
 every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become
>>> a
 time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
 committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to
>>> be
 left out for their own reasons. An example 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Pat Ferrel]

This has been an informal poll and it looks like people are ready. I suggest we 
push for graduation after the next release, which will be done by someone not 
Donald, I think we have 2 volunteers? I think this will be a requirement since 
it’s been mentioned by several IPMC members. 

I’d like to think several people could be our candidate VP but since most of 
them are too busy and since we have another great candidate in Donald, I’d like 
to nominate him for TLP Chair/VP.

I’d suggest we poll the committers and PMC members to see if any want out of 
the TLP, and otherwise go with the current list. We should try to add any 
committers that are ready before the graduation push, the more the better to 
the IPMC.

We should put this in a proposal and get mentors feedback before applying since 
mentors are also IPMC members.

Andy has mentioned several choices for convention that we should discuss, like 
our choice of git flow for commit process. He mentioned rotating Chair, which 
seems better suited to a larger project IMO but please chime in if you like the 
idea.

If that is all clear we have to release, have a podling vote, then have the 
IPMC vote. If there is anything else regarding how we are run speak up now.


On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:01 AM, takako shimamoto  wrote:

I'd like to remain as committer and contribute my humble efforts to
the prosperity of the project.

> I propose we stay with the current PMC and committer list unless someone 
> wants to remove themselves.

It may be good. In fact, most of committers carry out a task with
limited time. Anyway I hope the project will progress in a good
direction.



2017-09-06 3:43 GMT+09:00 Pat Ferrel :
> I personally don’t see much benefit in removing people unless they prove the 
> exception. AFAIK this generally does not happen in ASF. I’m certainly not 
> aware of the process except that it is easier in moving from podling to TLP.  
> You prove some worthiness and once that’s done, it’s done. A poll might just 
> ask project members if they want to be removed. I have seen people ask to be 
> removed from PMC and also “go emeritus” and those are cases of the 
> individuals making the choice.
> 
> So to settle the role call issue I propose we stay with the current PMC and 
> committer list unless someone wants to remove themselves.
> 
> As to maturity I agree with Donald that the checklist is heavy in our favor.
> 
> 
> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Simon Chan  wrote:
> 
> +1 for graduation
> 
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
>> provide historical context to these processes.
>> 
>> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
>> 
>> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
>> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
>> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
>> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
>> 
>> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
>> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
>> 
>> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
>> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
>> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
>> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
>> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
>> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
>> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
>> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
>> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
>> main ASF doc)
>> - IN10, IN20
>> 
>> Let me know what you think.
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>> 
>>> The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
>>> PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a
>> valuable
>>> role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
>>> list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
>>> every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become
>> a
>>> time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
>>> committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to
>> be
>>> left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
>>> trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
>>> ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of
>> destroying
>>> team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
>>> don’t read everything so chime in here.
>>> 
>>> It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
>>> I’d like to remain on the PMC 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[takako shimamoto]

I'd like to remain as committer and contribute my humble efforts to
the prosperity of the project.

> I propose we stay with the current PMC and committer list unless someone 
> wants to remove themselves.

It may be good. In fact, most of committers carry out a task with
limited time. Anyway I hope the project will progress in a good
direction.



2017-09-06 3:43 GMT+09:00 Pat Ferrel :
> I personally don’t see much benefit in removing people unless they prove the 
> exception. AFAIK this generally does not happen in ASF. I’m certainly not 
> aware of the process except that it is easier in moving from podling to TLP.  
> You prove some worthiness and once that’s done, it’s done. A poll might just 
> ask project members if they want to be removed. I have seen people ask to be 
> removed from PMC and also “go emeritus” and those are cases of the 
> individuals making the choice.
>
> So to settle the role call issue I propose we stay with the current PMC and 
> committer list unless someone wants to remove themselves.
>
> As to maturity I agree with Donald that the checklist is heavy in our favor.
>
>
> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Simon Chan  wrote:
>
> +1 for graduation
>
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
>> provide historical context to these processes.
>>
>> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
>>
>> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
>> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
>> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
>> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
>>
>> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
>> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
>>
>> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
>> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
>> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
>> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
>> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
>> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
>> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
>> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
>> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
>> main ASF doc)
>> - IN10, IN20
>>
>> Let me know what you think.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>>
>>> The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
>>> PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a
>> valuable
>>> role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
>>> list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
>>> every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become
>> a
>>> time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
>>> committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to
>> be
>>> left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
>>> trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
>>> ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of
>> destroying
>>> team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
>>> don’t read everything so chime in here.
>>>
>>> It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
>>> I’d like to remain on the PMC as a committer but have no interest in
>> Chair.
>>> Since people can become busy periodically and not read @dev (me?) we
>> could,
>>> maybe should, poll the current committers and PMC to get the lists ready
>>> for the graduation proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>> Don’t forget that we are not just asking for dev community opinion about
>>> graduation. We are also asking that people check things like the Maturity
>>> Checklist to see it we are ready. http://community.apache.org/
>>> apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html <
>>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-
>> maturity-model.html>
>>> People seem fairly enthusiastic about applying for graduation, but are
>>> there things we need to do before hand? The goal is to show that we do
>> not
>>> require the second level check for decisions that the IPMC provides. The
>>> last release required no changes but had a proviso about content
>> licenses.
>>> This next release should fly through without provisos IMHO. Are there
>> other
>>> things we should do?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:16 AM, takako shimamoto 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I entirely agree with everyone else.
>>> I hope the PIO community will become more active after graduation.
>>>
 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
>>> initial

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Naoki Takezoe]

+1 for graduation after 0.12.0.
It has a binary distribution which makes PredictionIO easy to try.
Also license of dependent libraries are now managed perfectly.
I think it's a time to graduation.

I want to stay PMC to continue to my work for PredictionIO after
graduation as well.

2017-09-06 2:32 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto :
> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
> provide historical context to these processes.
>
> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
>
> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
>
> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
>
> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
> main ASF doc)
> - IN10, IN20
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>
>> The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
>> PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a valuable
>> role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
>> list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
>> every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become a
>> time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
>> committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to be
>> left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
>> trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
>> ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of destroying
>> team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
>> don’t read everything so chime in here.
>>
>> It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
>> I’d like to remain on the PMC as a committer but have no interest in Chair.
>> Since people can become busy periodically and not read @dev (me?) we could,
>> maybe should, poll the current committers and PMC to get the lists ready
>> for the graduation proposal.
>>
>>
>> Don’t forget that we are not just asking for dev community opinion about
>> graduation. We are also asking that people check things like the Maturity
>> Checklist to see it we are ready. http://community.apache.org/
>> apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html <
>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html>
>> People seem fairly enthusiastic about applying for graduation, but are
>> there things we need to do before hand? The goal is to show that we do not
>> require the second level check for decisions that the IPMC provides. The
>> last release required no changes but had a proviso about content licenses.
>> This next release should fly through without provisos IMHO. Are there other
>> things we should do?
>>
>>
>> On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:16 AM, takako shimamoto  wrote:
>>
>> I entirely agree with everyone else.
>> I hope the PIO community will become more active after graduation.
>>
>> > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
>> initial
>> > PMC?
>>
>> Don't all present IPMC members are included in the list of the initial PMC?
>>
>> Personally, I think we may as well check and see if present IPMC
>> members intend to become an initial PMC for graduation.
>> Members who make a declaration of intent to become it will surely
>> contribute to the project.
>> It is a great contribution not only to develop a program but also to
>> respond to email aggressively or fix document.
>>
>>
>> 2017-08-29 14:20 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto :
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
>> > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
>> minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
>> > PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
>> > almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
>> these
>> > 3 things:
>> >
>> > 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
>> > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
>> initial
>> > PMC?
>> > 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>> >

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Pat Ferrel]

I personally don’t see much benefit in removing people unless they prove the 
exception. AFAIK this generally does not happen in ASF. I’m certainly not aware 
of the process except that it is easier in moving from podling to TLP.  You 
prove some worthiness and once that’s done, it’s done. A poll might just ask 
project members if they want to be removed. I have seen people ask to be 
removed from PMC and also “go emeritus” and those are cases of the individuals 
making the choice. 

So to settle the role call issue I propose we stay with the current PMC and 
committer list unless someone wants to remove themselves. 

As to maturity I agree with Donald that the checklist is heavy in our favor.


On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Simon Chan  wrote:

+1 for graduation

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
> provide historical context to these processes.
> 
> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
> 
> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
> 
> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
> 
> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
> main ASF doc)
> - IN10, IN20
> 
> Let me know what you think.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> 
>> The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
>> PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a
> valuable
>> role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
>> list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
>> every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become
> a
>> time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
>> committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to
> be
>> left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
>> trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
>> ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of
> destroying
>> team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
>> don’t read everything so chime in here.
>> 
>> It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
>> I’d like to remain on the PMC as a committer but have no interest in
> Chair.
>> Since people can become busy periodically and not read @dev (me?) we
> could,
>> maybe should, poll the current committers and PMC to get the lists ready
>> for the graduation proposal.
>> 
>> 
>> Don’t forget that we are not just asking for dev community opinion about
>> graduation. We are also asking that people check things like the Maturity
>> Checklist to see it we are ready. http://community.apache.org/
>> apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html <
>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-
> maturity-model.html>
>> People seem fairly enthusiastic about applying for graduation, but are
>> there things we need to do before hand? The goal is to show that we do
> not
>> require the second level check for decisions that the IPMC provides. The
>> last release required no changes but had a proviso about content
> licenses.
>> This next release should fly through without provisos IMHO. Are there
> other
>> things we should do?
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:16 AM, takako shimamoto 
> wrote:
>> 
>> I entirely agree with everyone else.
>> I hope the PIO community will become more active after graduation.
>> 
>>> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
>> initial
>>> PMC?
>> 
>> Don't all present IPMC members are included in the list of the initial
> PMC?
>> 
>> Personally, I think we may as well check and see if present IPMC
>> members intend to become an initial PMC for graduation.
>> Members who make a declaration of intent to become it will surely
>> contribute to the project.
>> It is a great contribution not only to develop a program but also to
>> respond to email aggressively or fix document.
>> 
>> 
>> 2017-08-29 14:20 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Simon Chan]

+1 for graduation

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
> provide historical context to these processes.
>
> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
>
> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
>
> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
>
> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
> main ASF doc)
> - IN10, IN20
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>
> > The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
> > PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a
> valuable
> > role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
> > list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
> > every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become
> a
> > time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
> > committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to
> be
> > left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
> > trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
> > ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of
> destroying
> > team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
> > don’t read everything so chime in here.
> >
> > It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
> > I’d like to remain on the PMC as a committer but have no interest in
> Chair.
> > Since people can become busy periodically and not read @dev (me?) we
> could,
> > maybe should, poll the current committers and PMC to get the lists ready
> > for the graduation proposal.
> >
> >
> > Don’t forget that we are not just asking for dev community opinion about
> > graduation. We are also asking that people check things like the Maturity
> > Checklist to see it we are ready. http://community.apache.org/
> > apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html <
> > http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-
> maturity-model.html>
> > People seem fairly enthusiastic about applying for graduation, but are
> > there things we need to do before hand? The goal is to show that we do
> not
> > require the second level check for decisions that the IPMC provides. The
> > last release required no changes but had a proviso about content
> licenses.
> > This next release should fly through without provisos IMHO. Are there
> other
> > things we should do?
> >
> >
> > On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:16 AM, takako shimamoto 
> wrote:
> >
> > I entirely agree with everyone else.
> > I hope the PIO community will become more active after graduation.
> >
> > > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> > initial
> > > PMC?
> >
> > Don't all present IPMC members are included in the list of the initial
> PMC?
> >
> > Personally, I think we may as well check and see if present IPMC
> > members intend to become an initial PMC for graduation.
> > Members who make a declaration of intent to become it will surely
> > contribute to the project.
> > It is a great contribution not only to develop a program but also to
> > respond to email aggressively or fix document.
> >
> >
> > 2017-08-29 14:20 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto :
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> > > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> > minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> > > PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> > > almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
> > these
> > > 3 things:
> > >
> > > 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> > > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> > initial
> > > PMC?
> > > 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
> > >
> > > These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> > > official graduation guide:
> > > 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Mars Hall]

Please continue to include me as a committer and PMC member.

After some deliberation, I cannot take on further responsibility as VP at
this time.

*Mars


On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

> Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
> provide historical context to these processes.
>
> As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.
>
> I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
> said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
> while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
> acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.
>
> *>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
> this thread, please acknowledge. <<*
>
> Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
> - CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
> - LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
> - RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
> - QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
> - CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
> operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
> standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
> - CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
> main ASF doc)
> - IN10, IN20
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>
> > The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
> > PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a
> valuable
> > role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
> > list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
> > every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become
> a
> > time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
> > committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to
> be
> > left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
> > trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
> > ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of
> destroying
> > team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
> > don’t read everything so chime in here.
> >
> > It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
> > I’d like to remain on the PMC as a committer but have no interest in
> Chair.
> > Since people can become busy periodically and not read @dev (me?) we
> could,
> > maybe should, poll the current committers and PMC to get the lists ready
> > for the graduation proposal.
> >
> >
> > Don’t forget that we are not just asking for dev community opinion about
> > graduation. We are also asking that people check things like the Maturity
> > Checklist to see it we are ready. http://community.apache.org/
> > apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html <
> > http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-
> maturity-model.html>
> > People seem fairly enthusiastic about applying for graduation, but are
> > there things we need to do before hand? The goal is to show that we do
> not
> > require the second level check for decisions that the IPMC provides. The
> > last release required no changes but had a proviso about content
> licenses.
> > This next release should fly through without provisos IMHO. Are there
> other
> > things we should do?
> >
> >
> > On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:16 AM, takako shimamoto 
> wrote:
> >
> > I entirely agree with everyone else.
> > I hope the PIO community will become more active after graduation.
> >
> > > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> > initial
> > > PMC?
> >
> > Don't all present IPMC members are included in the list of the initial
> PMC?
> >
> > Personally, I think we may as well check and see if present IPMC
> > members intend to become an initial PMC for graduation.
> > Members who make a declaration of intent to become it will surely
> > contribute to the project.
> > It is a great contribution not only to develop a program but also to
> > respond to email aggressively or fix document.
> >
> >
> > 2017-08-29 14:20 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto :
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> > > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> > minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> > > PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> > > almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
> > these
> > > 3 things:
> > >
> > > 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> > > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> > initial
> > > PMC?
> > > 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
> > >
> > > These points 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Donald Szeto]

Thanks for the clarification Pat! It always help to have Apache veterans to
provide historical context to these processes.

As for me, I'd like to remain as PMC and committer.

I like the idea of polling the current committers and PMC, but like you
said, most of them got pretty busy and may not be reading mailing list in a
while. Maybe let me try a shout out here and see if anyone would
acknowledge it, so that we know whether a poll will be effective.

*>> If you're a PMC or committer who see this line but hasn't been replying
this thread, please acknowledge. <<*

Regarding the maturity model, this is my perception right now:
- CD10, CD20, CD30, CD40 (and we start to have CD50 as well)
- LC10, LC20, LC30, LC40, LC50
- RE10, RE20, RE30, RE50 (I think we hope to also do RE40 with 0.12)
- QU10, QU30, QU40, QU50 (we should put a bit of focus to QU20)
- CO10, CO20, CO30, CO40, CO60, CO70 (for CO50, I think we've been
operating under the assumption that PMC and contributors are pretty
standard definitions by ASF. We can call those out explicitly.)
- CS10, CS50 (We are also assuming implicitly CS20, CS30, and CS40 from
main ASF doc)
- IN10, IN20

Let me know what you think.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> The Chair, PMC, and Committers may be different after graduation.
> PMC/committers are sometimes not active committers but can have a valuable
> role as mentors, in non-technical roles, as support people on the mailing
> list, or as sometimes committers who don’t seem very active but come in
> every so often to make a key contribution. So I hope this doesn’t become a
> time to prune too deeply. I’d suggest we only do that if one of the
> committers has done something to lessen our project maturity or wants to be
> left out for their own reasons. An example of bad behavior is someone
> trying to exert corporate dominance (which is severely frowned on by the
> ASF). Another would be someone who is disruptive to the point of destroying
> team effectiveness. I personally haven’t seen any of this but purposely
> don’t read everything so chime in here.
>
> It would be good to have people declare their interest-level. As for me,
> I’d like to remain on the PMC as a committer but have no interest in Chair.
> Since people can become busy periodically and not read @dev (me?) we could,
> maybe should, poll the current committers and PMC to get the lists ready
> for the graduation proposal.
>
>
> Don’t forget that we are not just asking for dev community opinion about
> graduation. We are also asking that people check things like the Maturity
> Checklist to see it we are ready. http://community.apache.org/
> apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html <
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html>
> People seem fairly enthusiastic about applying for graduation, but are
> there things we need to do before hand? The goal is to show that we do not
> require the second level check for decisions that the IPMC provides. The
> last release required no changes but had a proviso about content licenses.
> This next release should fly through without provisos IMHO. Are there other
> things we should do?
>
>
> On Sep 1, 2017, at 6:16 AM, takako shimamoto  wrote:
>
> I entirely agree with everyone else.
> I hope the PIO community will become more active after graduation.
>
> > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> initial
> > PMC?
>
> Don't all present IPMC members are included in the list of the initial PMC?
>
> Personally, I think we may as well check and see if present IPMC
> members intend to become an initial PMC for graduation.
> Members who make a declaration of intent to become it will surely
> contribute to the project.
> It is a great contribution not only to develop a program but also to
> respond to email aggressively or fix document.
>
>
> 2017-08-29 14:20 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> > PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> > almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
> these
> > 3 things:
> >
> > 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> initial
> > PMC?
> > 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
> >
> > These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> > official graduation guide:
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
> >
> > In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> > trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
> >
> > I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs
> that
> > have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Shinsuke Sugaya]

+1 for graduation.

I'm interested in roles for PMC and Release Management.

shinsuke

2017-08-29 14:20 GMT+09:00 Donald Szeto :
> Hi all,
>
> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
> 3 things:
>
> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
> PMC?
> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>
> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> official graduation guide:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
>
> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
>
> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> out in previous releases by IPMC.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Regards,
> Donald

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Andrew Purtell]

Some TLPs decide to rotate the Chair role on a yearly basis. Some keep them for 
as long as the Chair is willing. You should think about what kind of convention 
for Chair role ownership you'd like to see (if even you have a preference at 
this point). 

I have been Chair of two projects at one time. I wouldn't say it is tedious. 
You need to pay attention, to act as the Board's liaison to the PMC. Keeping up 
on discussion email traffic and the monthly Board minutes is enough. Depending 
on project velocity the effort required will vary. For PIO I think it would not 
be too much. You'll need to prepare the quarterly report for your project. This 
takes maybe half an hour to accomplish every three months. Pat is right that 
the role confers no leadership and sometimes outside of Apache the position is 
misconstrued. The Chair is a secretary. It could be a good role for a 
nontechnical member of the PMC to take on, if you have one, a good opportunity 
to contribute to the project in a meaningful way outside of code development. 


> On Aug 31, 2017, at 2:30 AM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> 
> IMO the VP/Chair responsibilities are mostly administrative and tedious. In 
> the best case there is leadership but that will naturally come from thought 
> leaders with no regard to title.
> 
> 
> On Aug 30, 2017, at 4:41 PM, Chan Lee  wrote:
> 
> Agree with everyone else. +1 for graduation.
> 
> I was away for a while due to family issues, but I'd be happy to volunteer
> for release management.
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>> 
>> Along with the link Donald gave, check this out:
>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html
>> >> 
>> 
>> We will need at least 2 release managers before graduation, any volunteers?
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:51 PM, Mars Hall  wrote:
>> 
>> Thank you Donald for leading the charge here,
>> 
>> From my perspective PredictionIO is already Apache in process & title.
>> Graduation seems quite natural to reach top-level recognition.
>> 
>> I'm interested in helping with PMC duties. Would be great to understand
>> what the VP vs Member responsibilities look like.
>> 
>> Let's graduate. +1
>> 
>> *Mars
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 15:21 Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have had several people tell me they want to wait until PIO is not
>>> incubating before using it. This even after explaining that “incubating”
>>> has more to do with getting into the Apache Way of doing things and has
>> no
>>> direct link to quality or community. I can only conclude from this that
>>> “incubating” is holding back adoption.
>>> 
>>> And yet we have absorbed the Apache Way and will have at least 3 releases
>>> (including 12) a incubating. We have brought in a fair number of new
>>> committers and seem to have a healthy community of users.
>>> 
>>> +1 for a push to graduate.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
>>> 
>>> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
>> minutes_2017_05_17.txt
>>> ),
>>> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
>>> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
>> these
>>> 3 things:
>>> 
>>> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
>>> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
>> initial
>>> PMC?
>>> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>>> 
>>> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
>>> official graduation guide:
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
>>> 
>>> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
>>> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
>>> 
>>> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs
>> that
>>> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0
>> will
>>> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
>>> out in previous releases by IPMC.
>>> 
>>> Let me know what you think.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Donald
>>> 
>>> --
>> *Mars Hall
>> 415-818-7039
>> Customer Facing Architect
>> Salesforce Platform / Heroku
>> San Francisco, California
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Pat Ferrel]

IMO the VP/Chair responsibilities are mostly administrative and tedious. In the 
best case there is leadership but that will naturally come from thought leaders 
with no regard to title.


On Aug 30, 2017, at 4:41 PM, Chan Lee  wrote:

Agree with everyone else. +1 for graduation.

I was away for a while due to family issues, but I'd be happy to volunteer
for release management.


On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> Along with the link Donald gave, check this out:
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html
> > 
> 
> We will need at least 2 release managers before graduation, any volunteers?
> 
> 
> On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:51 PM, Mars Hall  wrote:
> 
> Thank you Donald for leading the charge here,
> 
> From my perspective PredictionIO is already Apache in process & title.
> Graduation seems quite natural to reach top-level recognition.
> 
> I'm interested in helping with PMC duties. Would be great to understand
> what the VP vs Member responsibilities look like.
> 
> Let's graduate. +1
> 
> *Mars
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 15:21 Pat Ferrel  wrote:
> 
>> I have had several people tell me they want to wait until PIO is not
>> incubating before using it. This even after explaining that “incubating”
>> has more to do with getting into the Apache Way of doing things and has
> no
>> direct link to quality or community. I can only conclude from this that
>> “incubating” is holding back adoption.
>> 
>> And yet we have absorbed the Apache Way and will have at least 3 releases
>> (including 12) a incubating. We have brought in a fair number of new
>> committers and seem to have a healthy community of users.
>> 
>> +1 for a push to graduate.
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
>> 
>> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> minutes_2017_05_17.txt
>> ),
>> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
>> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
> these
>> 3 things:
>> 
>> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
>> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> initial
>> PMC?
>> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>> 
>> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
>> official graduation guide:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
>> 
>> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
>> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
>> 
>> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs
> that
>> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0
> will
>> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
>> out in previous releases by IPMC.
>> 
>> Let me know what you think.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Donald
>> 
>> --
> *Mars Hall
> 415-818-7039
> Customer Facing Architect
> Salesforce Platform / Heroku
> San Francisco, California
> 
> 

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Chan Lee]

Agree with everyone else. +1 for graduation.

I was away for a while due to family issues, but I'd be happy to volunteer
for release management.


On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> Along with the link Donald gave, check this out:
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html
>  >
>
> We will need at least 2 release managers before graduation, any volunteers?
>
>
> On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:51 PM, Mars Hall  wrote:
>
> Thank you Donald for leading the charge here,
>
> From my perspective PredictionIO is already Apache in process & title.
> Graduation seems quite natural to reach top-level recognition.
>
> I'm interested in helping with PMC duties. Would be great to understand
> what the VP vs Member responsibilities look like.
>
> Let's graduate. +1
>
> *Mars
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 15:21 Pat Ferrel  wrote:
>
> > I have had several people tell me they want to wait until PIO is not
> > incubating before using it. This even after explaining that “incubating”
> > has more to do with getting into the Apache Way of doing things and has
> no
> > direct link to quality or community. I can only conclude from this that
> > “incubating” is holding back adoption.
> >
> > And yet we have absorbed the Apache Way and will have at least 3 releases
> > (including 12) a incubating. We have brought in a fair number of new
> > committers and seem to have a healthy community of users.
> >
> > +1 for a push to graduate.
> >
> >
> > On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> >
> > http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_
> minutes_2017_05_17.txt
> > ),
> > PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> > almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on
> these
> > 3 things:
> >
> > 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> > 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the
> initial
> > PMC?
> > 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
> >
> > These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> > official graduation guide:
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
> >
> > In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> > trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
> >
> > I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs
> that
> > have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0
> will
> > contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> > out in previous releases by IPMC.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Donald
> >
> > --
> *Mars Hall
> 415-818-7039
> Customer Facing Architect
> Salesforce Platform / Heroku
> San Francisco, California
>
>

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Pat Ferrel]

Along with the link Donald gave, check this out: 
http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html 


We will need at least 2 release managers before graduation, any volunteers?


On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:51 PM, Mars Hall  wrote:

Thank you Donald for leading the charge here,

From my perspective PredictionIO is already Apache in process & title.
Graduation seems quite natural to reach top-level recognition.

I'm interested in helping with PMC duties. Would be great to understand
what the VP vs Member responsibilities look like.

Let's graduate. +1

*Mars


On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 15:21 Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> I have had several people tell me they want to wait until PIO is not
> incubating before using it. This even after explaining that “incubating”
> has more to do with getting into the Apache Way of doing things and has no
> direct link to quality or community. I can only conclude from this that
> “incubating” is holding back adoption.
> 
> And yet we have absorbed the Apache Way and will have at least 3 releases
> (including 12) a incubating. We have brought in a fair number of new
> committers and seem to have a healthy community of users.
> 
> +1 for a push to graduate.
> 
> 
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
> 
> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_05_17.txt
> ),
> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
> 3 things:
> 
> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
> PMC?
> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
> 
> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> official graduation guide:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
> 
> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
> 
> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> out in previous releases by IPMC.
> 
> Let me know what you think.
> 
> Regards,
> Donald
> 
> --
*Mars Hall
415-818-7039
Customer Facing Architect
Salesforce Platform / Heroku
San Francisco, California

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Mars Hall]

Thank you Donald for leading the charge here,

>From my perspective PredictionIO is already Apache in process & title.
Graduation seems quite natural to reach top-level recognition.

I'm interested in helping with PMC duties. Would be great to understand
what the VP vs Member responsibilities look like.

Let's graduate. +1

*Mars


On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 15:21 Pat Ferrel  wrote:

> I have had several people tell me they want to wait until PIO is not
> incubating before using it. This even after explaining that “incubating”
> has more to do with getting into the Apache Way of doing things and has no
> direct link to quality or community. I can only conclude from this that
> “incubating” is holding back adoption.
>
> And yet we have absorbed the Apache Way and will have at least 3 releases
> (including 12) a incubating. We have brought in a fair number of new
> committers and seem to have a healthy community of users.
>
> +1 for a push to graduate.
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
>
> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_05_17.txt
> ),
> PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
> almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
> 3 things:
>
> 1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
> 2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
> PMC?
> 3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?
>
> These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
> official graduation guide:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.
>
> In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
> trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.
>
> I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
> have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
> contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
> out in previous releases by IPMC.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Regards,
> Donald
>
> --
*Mars Hall
415-818-7039
Customer Facing Architect
Salesforce Platform / Heroku
San Francisco, California

Re: Graduation to TLP

[Pat Ferrel]

I have had several people tell me they want to wait until PIO is not incubating 
before using it. This even after explaining that “incubating” has more to do 
with getting into the Apache Way of doing things and has no direct link to 
quality or community. I can only conclude from this that “incubating” is 
holding back adoption.

And yet we have absorbed the Apache Way and will have at least 3 releases 
(including 12) a incubating. We have brought in a fair number of new committers 
and seem to have a healthy community of users.

+1 for a push to graduate.  


On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:20 PM, Donald Szeto  wrote:

Hi all,

Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
3 things:

1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
PMC?
3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?

These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
official graduation guide:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.

In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.

I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
out in previous releases by IPMC.

Let me know what you think.

Regards,
Donald

Graduation to TLP

[Donald Szeto]

Hi all,

Since the ASF Board meeting in May (
http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_05_17.txt),
PredictionIO has been considered nearing graduation and I think we are
almost there. I am kickstarting this thread so that we can discuss on these
3 things:

1. Does the development community feel ready to graduate?
2. If we are to graduate, who should we include in the list of the initial
PMC?
3. If we are to graduate, who should be the VP of the initial PMC?

These points are relevant for graduation. Please take a look at the
official graduation guide:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html.

In addition, Sara and I have been working to transfer the PredictionIO
trademark to the ASF. We will keep you updated with our progress.

I would also like to propose to cut a 0.12.0 release by merging JIRAs that
have a target version set to 0.12.0-incubating for graduation. 0.12.0 will
contain cleanups for minor license and copyright issues that were pointed
out in previous releases by IPMC.

Let me know what you think.

Regards,
Donald