Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a list of current and proposed initiatives?
I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way they are easy to maintain by respective contributors. Thanks On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look > like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask > for. It might be an incremental improvement on > https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more > for users, to just give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam > Python on Flink would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried > at https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status. > > Kenn > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > >> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the >> impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and >> when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals >> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of >> initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or >> ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a >> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction? >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS >>> projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here >>> are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any >>> project you can think of that might be interesting examples. >>> >>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not >>> do timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, >>> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into >>> roadmaps for sub-bits. >>> >>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though) >>> - >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan >>> - >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals >>> >>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable >>> format): >>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html >>> >>> Apache Apex >>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html >>> >>> Apache Calcite Avatica >>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html >>> >>> Apache Kafka >>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan >>> >>> Tensorflow >>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap >>> >>> Kubernetes >>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones >>> >>> Firefox >>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap >>> >>> Servo >>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap >>> >>> Bazel >>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html >>> >>> Kenn >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson < >>> timrobertson...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Kenn, >>>> >>>> I think this is a very good idea. >>>> >>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who >>>> need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get >>>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@ >>>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a >>>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification. >>>> >>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without >>>> mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid. >>>> >>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for >>>> more detail and to help show transparent progress >>>> >>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important >>>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos >>>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the >>>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style? >>>> >>>> Tim >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important >>>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the >>>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Great idea, Kenn! >>>>>> >>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the >>>>>> page from the web site. >>>>>> >>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea >>>>>> of >>>>>> what to expect. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features >>>>>> and >>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months) >>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org >>>>>> > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> a écrit : >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Hi all, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in >>>>>> the >>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on >>>>>> it >>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I >>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives >>>>>> (ongoing >>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we >>>>>> had >>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4]. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what >>>>>> would >>>>>> > be on it: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for >>>>>> users? >>>>>> > - Where should it be presented? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web >>>>>> site, >>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on >>>>>> first, >>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In >>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of >>>>>> that >>>>>> > list varies widely. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to >>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Kenn >>>>>> > >>>>>> > [1] >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>> > [2] >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>> > [3] >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>> > [4] >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>> > >>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>
