Some folks include project health metrics within their board report. I don't think it's required, but it is nice to have it summarized for the board so that they don't have to go hunting that information down if they're interested.
What would be really cool is if we had a nice "dashboard" view of all of our project metrics, so that the board members (and of course anyone else) could easily see a snapshot of how the project is doing (at least by the numbers). On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:32 AM, Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com>wrote: > In the case of Apache Tapestry, I'd argue that the wording in the report > is accurate. That's besides the point though. We've used the same project > description repeatedly in previous reports. I'm not sure what you want to > indicate to the project. I see you you are a VP of OODT but not a current > of member of the board. To my knowledge, the board has not weighed in > previously and I don't see a reason why they would weigh in now. Tapestry > itself has been around for a long time (from 2004 as Jakarta subproject) > and in all likelihood we'll continue to be around. If you personally would > like to check superfluous metrics about the project health, it's easy to > see the mailing list traffic volume ( > http://markmail.org/search/?q=list%3Aorg.apache.tapestry.users) or > relative rankings among projects (Where do visitors go on apache.org at > http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/apache.org), just for examples. We'll note > hard metrics whenever we add members or make other changes, but we simply > didn't have anything significant to note this time around. > > Kalle > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <ke...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Marketing, eh? >> >> One trick I learned in marketing is to look at what you say about your >> product and REVERSE all the adjectives and ask: would your competition say >> any of those things about their own product? >> >> If the answer is no, then you should drop those terms from the >> endorsement of your own product, as they are by definition vacuous and >> empty. Stick to the facts. >> >> To whit: >> >> "Apache Tapestry is a Java component-based web framework that features >> high productivity, great code reuse, robust deployment, and terrific >> performance." >> >> Or ... >> >> "Apache Tapestry is a Java component-based web framework." >> >> There, isn't that cleaner and clear of fluff? >> >> (You might also include other metrics on project health, releases, >> committers, PMC additions, etc.; info that the board would really find >> useful and fluff-free. But they'll weigh into that, I'm sure.) >> >> Respectfully, >> --k >> >> -- >> Sean Kelly >> VP, Apache OODT >> Apache Software Foundation >> >> >> >> On 2013.Oct.8, at 7.19p, Howard Lewis Ship <hls...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Apache Tapestry is a Java component-based web framework that features >> > high productivity, great code reuse, robust deployment, and terrific >> > performance. >> > >> > Progress continues on the 5.4 release, which is still in alpha. There >> have been >> > several further preview releases. >> > >> > -- >> > Howard M. Lewis Ship >> > >> > Creator of Apache Tapestry >> > >> > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to >> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! >> > >> > (971) 678-5210 >> > http://howardlewisship.com >> >> >
