+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 <don...@apache.org>: > 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 <p...@occamsmachete.com> 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 <chiboch...@gmail.com> 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 <don...@apache.org>: >> > 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 >> >> -- Naoki Takezoe
