We have addressed the items that were brought up during the initial graduation discussion.
The next step would be preparation of resolution and community vote. I think it is time for Apex to graduate and become a top level project. What's your take? Thanks, Thomas On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Sasha Parfenov <[email protected]> wrote: > Following up an earlier question by Justin, I have verified that all > contributors to original docs repository are covered by ICLA. See comments > in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-293 for details. > > Thanks, > Sasha > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Chris Nauroth <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > That's a good point. Maybe defer this until the last possible moment > > before launching the IPMC vote. It's unlikely that you'll change the > > committer or PMC roster during the vote, so that ought to reduce the > > likelihood of double maintenance burden. > > > > --Chris Nauroth > > > > > > > > > > On 1/27/16, 11:36 PM, "Thomas Weise" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >Chris, > > > > > >Thanks, this is very helpful. I have created tickets for these items > (hope > > >you don't mind I made you the reporter): > > > > > >https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql > > >=project%20%3D%20APEXCORE%20and%20labels%20%3D%20tlp > > > > > >I was under the impression that the "Who We Are" page should be setup at > > >time of graduation to replace the information on the status page. But if > > >it > > >is best practice, we will do the double maintenance ;-) > > > > > >Thanks again, > > >Thomas > > > > > >On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Chris Nauroth < > [email protected]> > > >wrote: > > > > > >> I agree that it's good to start the graduation discussion, pending > > >> resolution of the documentation and release items mentioned by other > > >> mentors in the thread. I've been very impressed with this community's > > >> level of activity and openness. > > >> > > >> I took a pass through the maturity model, and I'd like to call out the > > >> items that may need additional work. I also have pointed out examples > > >>of > > >> how an existing project meets these criteria. (I used Hadoop, because > > >> it's the project I know best.) > > >> > > >> This exercise is best done as a self-evaluation by the most involved > > >> contributors, so it's possible that my perspective is incomplete. I > > >> encourage more of the deeply involved community members to review the > > >> maturity model in detail and draw their own conclusions. > > >> > > >> Also, I want to make sure it's clear that the maturity model is not an > > >> absolute list of requirements. It is the community's choice on > whether > > >>or > > >> not to address these points before a graduation proposal. However, > some > > >> IPMC members do use the maturity model as a checklist to gauge the > > >>health > > >> of a podling, so you'll bolster your case for graduation with the > wider > > >> IPMC if you choose to take action on them. I also think all of these > > >> things are generally good for the project anyway, so it's not just a > > >> matter of satisfying bureaucratic demands. > > >> > > >> QU30 > > >> The project provides a well-documented channel to report security > > >>issues, > > >> along with a documented way of responding to them. > > >> > > >> I couldn't find a security vulnerability process documented at > > >> apex.incubator.apache.org. Example: > > >> http://hadoop.apache.org/mailing_lists.html > > >> > > >> QU40 > > >> The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and aims > to > > >> document any incompatible changes and provide tools and documentation > to > > >> help users transition to new features. > > >> > > >> I couldn't find backwards-compatibility guidelines documented at > > >> apex.incubator.apache.org. Example: > > >> > > >> > > > http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.2/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Co > > >>mp > > >> atibility.html > > >> > > >> CS10 > > >> The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have > > >>decision > > >> power -- the project's PMC (Project Management Committee) consists of > > >> those contributors. > > >> > > >> I couldn't find a "Who We Are" page at apex.incubator.apache.org. I > > >>think > > >> the information is accurate in the incubation status page though. > > >> Example: https://hadoop.apache.org/who.html > > >> > > >> CS30 > > >> Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when discussion is > > >>not > > >> sufficient. > > >> > > >> I couldn't find any statement of this. Example: > > >> http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html > > >> > > >> > > >> --Chris Nauroth > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 1/25/16, 2:28 PM, "Sandesh Hegde" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> >+1 > > >> > > > >> >Code: CD50 > > >> >Licenses and Copyright: LC50 > > >> >Quality: QU50 > > >> >Community: CO50 > > >> >Independence: IN20 > > >> >Releases: RE40 > > >> > > > >> >Thanks > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:09 PM Justin Mclean > > >><[email protected]> > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi, > > >> >> > > >> >> It¹s not required but you might want to rate yourself with this [1] > > >> >>like a > > >> >> few other projects have done. [2][3] > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks, > > >> >> Justin > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.htm > > >> >>l > > >> >> 2. https://zest.apache.org/community/maturity.html > > >> >> 3. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/groovy/blob/576b3c5d6a7022ac4a8df1ef118666456ce > > >> >>627fb/MATURITY.adoc > > >> > > >> > > > > >
