On 23 Apr 2012, at 10:59, Kris Popat wrote: > > On 23 Apr 2012, at 10:37, Scott Wilson wrote: > >> >> On 23 Apr 2012, at 09:49, Ross Gardler wrote: >> >>> Board report due: >>> >>> In February we said "Wookie has a small, reasonably active community, >>> however, the majority of >>> that activity is focussed around one or two individuals." >>> >>> We also said: >>> >>> "as it stands we could probably graduate as we meet >>> the minimum criteria (5 committers from 3 organisations). We recognise that >>> some IPMC members would suggest graduation at this point might help >>> accelerate community growth. We intend to discuss this within the community >>> over the next quarter whilst also seeking to expand our community." >>> >> >> We're now 6 committers from 4 orgs... >> >>> However, we've pretty much failed to discuss this. This is not a good >>> sign. None of us have had the time to drive this important issue. >> >> Easter holidays did kind of get in the way... >> >>> >>> Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting there is a fundamental problem >>> here. I'm just saying we need to crack on with it. In my opinion our >>> incubator status is holding us back. Furthermore, Rave has graduated >>> and if we are not careful our incubation status will hold Rave back >>> too. >>> >>> I know from my own conversations with Wookie users that the >>> "incuabting" label is holding some people back (although it may just >>> as well be a convenient excuse). I propose that we undertake to >>> graduate in the next quarter. >> >> +1. >> >>> To do this we really need to address the >>> issues we identified last month: >>> >>> - [DONE] 0.9.2 release using an improved and simplified release process >>> - Developer outreach activity (see above) >>> - Improve communication about Wookie >>> - ASF Widgets demo >>> >>> So, some questions/ideas: >>> >>> Matt can you help Wookie get to the point of doing regular releases, >>> preferably synced with Rave. I don't mean Rave depends on a Wookie >>> making a new release, I mean we aim to have a new Wookie release out >>> two weeks before the next Rave release is due. >> >> I think 0.10.0 is almost ready to go. I'd say the only issue we need to >> address before starting the next release process is WOOKIE-326, the rest can >> be pushed back. > > Just looked over this. Is postWidget and deleteWidget the two main things > that still need to be done on the connector?
I updated the API doc, so you can check against this to see if anything is missing: http://incubator.apache.org/wookie/docs/api.html Post widget with response is new, as is Delete widget. >> >> I know Paul was also intending to write some doc on the release process. >> >>> >>> Developer outreach - we should undertake to update the tutorials. >>> Perhaps we need to focus more on the creation of widgets as a "simple >>> step" in, if these widgets can run stand-alone (without Wookie) this >>> will attract more people, however, we need to consider whether this is >>> changing the make-up of what the Wookie project is. It might be better >>> to do that in an associated apache-extras project. >> >> >> As for other developer outreach activity, we have our GSoC engagement this >> year. >> >> There will also be a good Wookie presence at both the DevEd and SURFNet >> events in May/June. >> >>> >>> Previously we discussed making it easy to create widgets that can be >>> usefully reused in the Apache CMS. The trademarks people are, for >>> example, looking at solutions for sponsor visibility. Concom need a >>> way of getting information about upcoming ASF events onto peoples >>> sites. It seems to me both of these are similar use cases. Can we >>> build them as templates? >> >> Sounds feasible. >> >>> >>> Ross >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Jukka Zitting <[email protected]> >>> Date: 22 April 2012 12:55 >>> Subject: May reports due in ten days >>> To: general <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> It'll soon be time for the podlings reporting in May [1] to start >>> drafting their reports. >>> >>> When doing so, please consider the review results from February [2]: >>> >>> IP clearance: Amber >>> Release trouble: Clerezza, Stanbol >>> Low activity: Ambari, Nuvem, PhotArk, SIS, Wink, Zeta Components >>> Low diversity: Airavata, Droids, VCL, Wookie >>> Ready to graduate: Jena, Lucene.NET, NPanday, OpenNLP >>> >>> Has the situation in your podling changed over the last three months? >>> If not, what's your plan for improving the situation? >>> >>> For example, I notice that Clerezza has made a release, but Stanbol >>> still needs one. Also, Lucene.NET and NPanday are yet to graduate. Did >>> something come up to prevent progress, or have you just not gotten >>> around to it yet (which BTW is fine; much better than having bigger >>> issues)? >>> >>> And to any projects in the "Low activity" category that still aren't >>> seeing increased activity: Do you have a good reason to expect >>> activity to pick up, or should we consider retiring the project? >>> >>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/May2012 >>> [2] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/February2012 >>> >>> BR, >>> >>> Jukka Zitting >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler) >>> Programme Leader (Open Development) >>> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com >> >
