This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
jmclean pushed a commit to branch develop
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/training.git
The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/develop by this push:
new d145ea4 fix issue with :'s
d145ea4 is described below
commit d145ea487f77ee664a49d5433a3defe8c392ac78
Author: Justin Mclean <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Mon Sep 29 14:02:14 2025 +1000
fix issue with :'s
---
.../Incubator/IPMC/src/main/asciidoc/index.adoc | 52 +++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/content/Apache/Incubator/IPMC/src/main/asciidoc/index.adoc
b/content/Apache/Incubator/IPMC/src/main/asciidoc/index.adoc
index 2f66c85..3d8e49c 100644
--- a/content/Apache/Incubator/IPMC/src/main/asciidoc/index.adoc
+++ b/content/Apache/Incubator/IPMC/src/main/asciidoc/index.adoc
@@ -118,17 +118,17 @@ Oversight is primarily cultural and process-driven, not
bureaucratic.
--
== Reviewing Releases
-Check for\:
-* LICENSE and NOTICE files
-* Dependency license compliance
-* Correct process (vote on dev@, 72h minimum)
-* Branding and naming compliance
-* No compiled code in source
+* Check for:
+** LICENSE and NOTICE files
+** Dependency license compliance
+** Correct process (vote on dev@, 72h minimum)
+** Branding and naming compliance
+** No compiled code in source
[.notes]
--
Releases are where the IPMC’s role is most visible.
-Things to check\:
+Things to check:
- Are the LICENSE and NOTICE files present and correct?
- Do all dependencies have ASF-compatible licenses?
- Was the vote run properly on the dev@ list, with at least 72 hours?
@@ -138,17 +138,17 @@ Mentors may catch many issues, but a second set of eyes
is critical.
--
== Graduation Criteria
-Podlings must show\:
-* A sustainable, diverse community
-* ASF infrastructure and process use
-* Transparent, merit-based governance
-* At least one ASF release without mentor intervention
-* Licensing and branding compliance
+* Podlings must show:
+** A sustainable, diverse community
+** ASF infrastructure and process use
+** Transparent, merit-based governance
+** At least one ASF release without mentor intervention
+** Licensing and branding compliance
[.notes]
--
Graduation isn’t automatic - it’s a judgment call by the IPMC and Board.
-Key signals:
+Key signals:
- The community is active and not dominated by one vendor.
- They’ve switched to ASF infrastructure (lists, repos, website).
- Governance is transparent and merit-based: new committers and PPMC members
are added openly.
@@ -158,12 +158,12 @@ The Maturity Model can be a helpful checklist, but human
judgment is always requ
--
== Reviewing Graduation Proposals
-Look for\:
-* Community diversity and independence
-* Recent ASF-compliant releases
-* Mailing list engagement and transparency
-* Signs of self-governance
-* Questions or concerns — raise them!
+* Look for:
+** Community diversity and independence
+** Recent ASF-compliant releases
+** Mailing list engagement and transparency
+** Signs of self-governance
+** Questions or concerns — raise them!
[.notes]
--
@@ -178,12 +178,12 @@ Your feedback helps the Board and the community feel
confident about graduation.
--
== Monitoring Podling Health
-Watch for\:
-* Stalled communication
-* No release progress
-* Single-vendor dominance
-* Weak mentorship
-* Community stagnation
+* Watch for:
+** Stalled communication
+** No release progress
+** Single-vendor dominance
+** Weak mentorship
+** Community stagnation
[.notes]
--
