> There’s nothing wrong with his idea, I only want to improve it. I think we all do :)
On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 7:48 PM Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On May 31, 2026, at 10:23 AM, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > I think there might be a slight misunderstanding regarding Justin’s idea. > > It’s certainly not intended to replace the reporter and for sure not > > something any of PPMCs should just "send"! > > You are misunderstanding me here. I mentioned the board and the reporter > due to possible unintended consequences of overly automated reports. My > intent is to ask for caution and care including proof to the IPMC that the > Mentors and PPMC are doing so. > > > > > As I see it, Justin is proposing a "draft" to spark discussion and > > improvement within the PPMC, rather than a final report to be sent as-is. > > Because it's just an invitation to discussion, it feels a bit early for a > > formal mentor sign-off—which, by the way, I think is not the mentor's > > responsibility. > > Whether or not these draft reports are emailed to the dev list or provide > the new cwiki template there is still a concern that they will be > automatically used with little change. > > Justin - did I misunderstand where the draft podling reports will be > provided? Since you had sections to be filled in by the PPMC I assumed that > this is a new way for you to build the draft report in CWiki. > > > > > In my view, our role as mentors is to encourage the PPMC to really > "think" > > about these drafts—spending quality time reviewing sources, discussing > > statements, and refining the content into a meaningful report. I see my > > role as teaching them to make conscious decisions and reflect on their > > progress, rather than just "stamping" a document. > > > > Also I believe this experiment aligns perfectly with the Magpie > philosophy > > we have: AI acts as an assistant to analyze data and provide a starting > > point, but humans then take over. With good UX and clear sources, this > > should open a door to deeper community discussion. > > > > As a mentor in two projects I’m here to help them learn the "Apache Way," > > and I think these AI-generated drafts can be a great starting point for > > discussion on that! > > I’ve mentored podlings since early 2012 including the podling where Justin > first became an ASF committer. > > There’s nothing wrong with his idea, I only want to improve it. > > Best, > Dave > > > > > Best, > > Jarek > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 6:47 PM Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Inline below. > >> > >>> On May 30, 2026, at 2:19 PM, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Interesting ideas, Dave. > >>> > >>> Could you explain the reasoning behind those proposals? Why do you > think > >>> it's needed? > >> > >> (2) and (3) are the ones I think are most important. > >> > >>> > >>> J. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sat, May 30, 2026 at 9:28 PM Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Justin, > >>>> > >>>> Observations: > >>>> > >>>> (1) Consider moving the Mentor sign-off to the beginning of the > report. > >> > >> It would make clear at the beginning of the report that the Mentors have > >> signed off. > >> > >>>> (2) Add a section for PPMC members to sign-off. > >> > >> Since the report is now generated it should be clear that the podling is > >> paying attention and we should surface which PPMC members are > responsible. > >> This could help the IPMC vet graduation discussions on whether or not > the > >> proposed PMC chair is up to the one main duty and not just a figurehead > >> from a vendor. > >> > >>>> (3) Require a community written summary at the top. For podling's that > >>>> have been in the Incubator for more than 18 months add a section for > >>>> describing their exit strategy (graduation, retirement, something > else) > >> > >> Some Board Members over the last several years have been frustrated with > >> the reporter and how it will generate a report that can be filed with > >> little thought. Changing to this AI generated report brings the > Incubator > >> more towards this “unthinking” approach. The report needs to include > some > >> human thoughts about the podling's progress. This should be upfront and > >> free-form perhaps with an issues for the IPMC question as well. > >> > >> For example, I joined Pony Mail as Mentor a year or two ago because it > is > >> a special case of mostly ASF Members who don’t currently make releases. > The > >> membership of the community includes both ASF staff and via a vendor > >> relationship with Infra including some principals from the > >> lists.apache.org vendor. This project does not belong in the Incubator, > >> the Incubator is not helping this entirely unique situation. But it may > or > >> may not be a good TLP group. > >> > >> Other times there are Podling’s that naturally have slow growing > >> communities and one of their impediments to growth is remaining in the > >> Incubator. These are situations that should be highlighted in the IPMC > >> report. > >> > >> This proposed section communicates to the IPMC in a way that breaks down > >> the mechanical nature of Incubation. > >> > >>>> (4) If there is no sign-off from Mentors and PPMC then consider if the > >>>> report should be included or not. > >> > >> If no one involved in the podling has signed off then I don’t think the > >> IPMC report should include them. I believe this is already the case, but > >> the IPMC could decide to show these with a heading. > >> > >> Best, > >> Dave > >> > >>>> > >>>> Best, > >>>> Dave > >>>> > >>>>> On May 30, 2026, at 12:38 AM, Justin Mclean < > [email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> The recent MCP discussed obtaining most of the data needed to create > a > >>>> draft report for a project. > >>>>> > >>>>> What would people think about populating the incubator report with a > >>>> draft report along these lines? > >>>>> > >>>>> Here’s one I generated for Hamilton (I’ve not edited this in any > way). > >> I > >>>> know the Hamilton report will be different from this, but as you can > >> see, > >>>> it can generate useful information in a few minutes. > >>>>> Apache Hamilton (Incubating) -- May 2026 Report > >>>>> > >>>>> Hamilton is a lightweight in-process framework to define, execute, > and > >>>> observe directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) that express data > >> transformations. > >>>> In Hamilton, one can express complex DAGs of transformations, e.g. > from > >>>> dataframe transformations (using pandas, polars, PySpark), machine > >> learning > >>>> pipelines, through to regular software engineering API request and LLM > >> API > >>>> based workflows. Observability hooks are built into the framework. The > >>>> Hamilton UI is a self-hostable service to capture observability output > >> from > >>>> workflow runs. > >>>>> > >>>>> Hamilton has been incubating since 12 April 2025. > >>>>> > >>>>> Three most important unfinished issues to address before graduating: > >>>>> > >>>>> Release cadence for the core package. The last ASF-approved source > >>>> release on dist.apache.org is 1.89.0-incubating (October 2025). Vote > >>>> threads are currently open for sdk, ui, lsp, and contrib components, > >> but a > >>>> new ASF release of the core hamilton package is overdue. The project > >> should > >>>> complete at least one further approved release before graduation. > >>>>> > >>>>> PyPI package naming and provenance. The sf-hamilton package on PyPI > >>>> (version 1.90.0) does not carry the ALv2 license field or an Incubator > >>>> disclaimer in its project description. It is also unclear whether all > >>>> versions published to sf-hamilton and apache-hamilton were produced > >> solely > >>>> from IPMC-approved ASF releases; this should be confirmed and > documented > >>>> before graduation. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mentor engagement. The average mentor sign-off rate over the past 12 > >>>> months is 1.6 per report, which is below the level expected for > >> consistent > >>>> oversight. Mentors should confirm they are actively reviewing each > >> report > >>>> before graduation discussions proceed. > >>>>> > >>>>> Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware of? > >>>>> > >>>>> No. > >>>>> > >>>>> How has the community developed since the last report? > >>>>> > >>>>> Development activity has increased over the reporting window. Over > the > >>>> past three months the project recorded 128 commits from 16 unique > >>>> committers, compared with 257 commits from 27 committers over the full > >>>> 12-month window -- indicating that activity is concentrated in a > smaller > >>>> group recently but has not dropped off. The bus factor (50th > percentile) > >>>> has held at 2 across all windows, meaning the project remains > dependent > >> on > >>>> a small core of contributors; the 75th percentile is 3-4, which is an > >>>> improvement over the year. > >>>>> > >>>>> New contributor attraction remains healthy: 12 new contributors > >> appeared > >>>> in the last three months, consistent with the 12-month trend of 21. > >> Mailing > >>>> list participation on dev@ has been moderate: around 40 messages > from 9 > >>>> unique posters in the past three months. That is lower than the > 12-month > >>>> figure of 151 messages from 13 posters, suggesting the pace of general > >>>> discussion has softened outside of release activity. > >>>>> > >>>>> A proposal for an Airflow Provider for Hamilton was posted to dev@ > in > >>>> April 2026 and attracted community discussion, which is a positive > sign > >> of > >>>> broadening ecosystem interest. > >>>>> > >>>>> How has the project developed since the last report? > >>>>> > >>>>> The project is actively preparing multiple component releases. As of > >> the > >>>> reporting date, vote threads are open on dev@ for four sub-packages: > >>>> apache-hamilton-sdk 0.9.0, apache-hamilton-ui 0.0.18, > >> apache-hamilton-lsp > >>>> 0.2.0, and apache-hamilton-contrib 0.0.9 (all RC0, incubating). These > >> votes > >>>> were opened on 26 May 2026. > >>>>> > >>>>> The most recent completed ASF source release is 1.89.0-incubating, > >> dated > >>>> 11 October 2025, and is available at archive.apache.org with > signature > >>>> and SHA-512 checksum present. A GitHub release tagged > >>>> apache-hamilton-v1.90.0-incubating-RC0 was published on 25 April 2026 > >> but > >>>> is flagged as a release candidate and has not yet completed the formal > >> vote > >>>> process. > >>>>> > >>>>> The apache-hamilton package on PyPI is at version 1.90.0 and includes > >> an > >>>> Incubator disclaimer in its description. The older sf-hamilton package > >>>> redirects installers to apache-hamilton but its PyPI metadata does not > >>>> include the ALv2 license field or an Incubator disclaimer. > >>>>> > >>>>> How would you assess the podling's maturity? > >>>>> > >>>>> [ ] Initial setup > >>>>> [ ] Working towards first release > >>>>> [ ] Community building > >>>>> [x] Nearing graduation > >>>>> [ ] Other > >>>>> Date of last release: > >>>>> > >>>>> 11 October 2025 (apache-hamilton-1.89.0-incubating). Multiple > component > >>>> release votes (sdk, ui, lsp, contrib) are currently in progress as of > 26 > >>>> May 2026. > >>>>> > >>>>> When were the last committers or PPMC members elected? > >>>>> > >>>>> [PODLING TO COMPLETE] > >>>>> > >>>>> Have your mentors been helpful and responsive? > >>>>> > >>>>> Mentors are listed as Kevin Ratnasekera, Ayush Saxena, PJ Fanning, > and > >>>> Jarek Potiuk. Mentor participation is visible on dev@ -- PJ Fanning > and > >>>> Jarek Potiuk have engaged in recent release vote threads. The average > >>>> mentor sign-off rate over reported periods is 1.6, which is below the > >>>> expected level; the PPMC should confirm that all four mentors are > >> reviewing > >>>> reports regularly. > >>>>> > >>>>> Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks? > >>>>> > >>>>> [PODLING TO COMPLETE] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This was the prompt to create it: > >>>>> > >>>>> System prompt: Use only data retrieved from the Incubator MCP, > MailMCP, > >>>> ReleaseMCP, Health MCP, and Policy MCP to populate the report. Do not > >> use > >>>> any previous report content or training data. Follow these rules: > >>>>> > >>>>> The reporting window runs from the first day of the month of the last > >>>> report to today. Determine this from the podling's reporting schedule > >>>> retrieved in step 0. > >>>>> Do not include raw statistics as standalone facts. Instead interpret > >>>> them as trends by comparing across available time windows (3m, 6m, > 12m). > >>>> Note whether activity is growing, stable, or declining in plain > >> language. > >>>>> Only include a statistic directly if it is meaningful on its own, > such > >>>> as the number of releases, a specific release version, or a release > >> vote in > >>>> progress. > >>>>> Surface health concerns in the issues section -- such as declining > >>>> reviewer diversity, concentration of commit activity, or dropping > >> mailing > >>>> list engagement -- rather than leaving it blank. > >>>>> The "Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware > >>>> of?" section is for issues that require board-level attention -- such > as > >>>> legal concerns, governance breakdowns, or matters the IPMC cannot > >> resolve > >>>> alone. Routine release activity, compliance housekeeping, and > community > >>>> health watch items belong in other sections. If there are no > board-level > >>>> issues, write "No." > >>>>> Only call the Policy MCP if ReleaseMCP or Health MCP identifies a > >>>> potential compliance concern. If called, reference the relevant policy > >> in > >>>> the issues section. > >>>>> For any section the tools cannot populate, write [PODLING TO > COMPLETE] > >>>> on its own line. > >>>>> Do not copy forward language from any previous report. > >>>>> Write in plain, concise English suitable for an international > audience. > >>>> Avoid jargon. > >>>>> Output the completed report as a markdown document. User prompt: > Draft > >>>> the Incubator board report for Apache {podling} (Incubating) using the > >>>> following steps: > >>>>> Call the Incubator MCP to retrieve the podling's description, > >> incubation > >>>> start date, and reporting schedule to determine the current reporting > >>>> window start date. > >>>>> Call MailMCP to retrieve dev list activity since the start of the > >>>> reporting window, looking for release votes, discussion threads, and > >>>> significant proposals. > >>>>> Call ReleaseMCP to retrieve current release artifact evidence > including > >>>> dist, archive, PyPI, and GitHub. > >>>>> Call the Health MCP to retrieve community health metrics across all > >>>> available time windows. > >>>>> If ReleaseMCP or Health MCP identifies a potential compliance > concern, > >>>> call the Policy MCP to confirm the relevant policy and reference it in > >> the > >>>> issues section. > >>>>> Synthesise the results into the standard Incubator report template > >> below > >>>> and output as markdown. Template: markdown > >>>>> ## Apache {podling} (Incubating) -- {report month and year} Report > >>>>> > >>>>> {description from Incubator MCP} > >>>>> > >>>>> {podling} has been incubating since {start date from Incubator MCP}. > >>>>> > >>>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before > >> graduating: > >>>>> > >>>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware > >> of? > >>>>> > >>>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report? > >>>>> > >>>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report? > >>>>> > >>>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity? > >>>>> - [ ] Initial setup > >>>>> - [ ] Working towards first release > >>>>> - [ ] Community building > >>>>> - [ ] Nearing graduation > >>>>> - [ ] Other > >>>>> > >>>>> ### Date of last release: > >>>>> > >>>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected? > >>>>> > >>>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive? > >>>>> > >>>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks? > >>>>> > >>>>> And this is the list of MCP calls it made: > >>>>> Here are all MCP tool calls made, in order: > >>>>> > >>>>> podlings:reporting_schedule (name="Hamilton") -- retrieved Hamilton's > >>>> reporting group, cadence, and current report period to establish the > >>>> reporting window. > >>>>> ipmc:podling_brief (podling="Hamilton", brief_format="detailed") -- > >>>> retrieved incubation start date, mentor list, health summary, and key > >>>> indicators including commit counts, committer diversity, and active > >>>> concerns. > >>>>> ipmc:release_artifact_evidence (podling="Hamilton", > >>>> github_project="hamilton", include_platforms=true, > >>>> pypi_packages=["sf-hamilton", "apache-hamilton"]) -- retrieved > >> dist/archive > >>>> artifact evidence, GitHub releases, PyPI package metadata, Docker Hub > >>>> checks, and Maven checks. > >>>>> apache-health:compare_windows (podling="Hamilton", windows=["3m", > "6m", > >>>> "12m"]) -- retrieved community health metrics across all three windows > >> for > >>>> trend comparison (commits, committers, authors, dev posters, PRs, > >> releases, > >>>> mentor sign-offs, bus factor, reviewer diversity). > >>>>> incubator-mail:recent_podling_mail (podling="hamilton", > >> list_name="dev", > >>>> timespan="lte=3M", limit=20) -- retrieved recent dev@ activity > >> including > >>>> the four active release vote threads (sdk, ui, lsp, contrib) and the > >>>> Airflow Provider proposal discussion. > >>>>> podlings:get_podling (name="Hamilton") -- retrieved the full podling > >>>> description, champion, mentor names, and start date for inclusion in > the > >>>> report header. > >>>>> Kind Regards, > >>>>> Justin > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
