Fellow researchers,
please comment on the draft board report below.
Thanks,
Bernd
= Apache Labs Board Report, September 2010 =
Apache Labs hosts small and emerging projects from ASF committers.
[SUMMARY]
There has been moderate activity at Labs in the last quarter.
The PMC took care of stati for labs which saw no activity for a long time.
We present one issue to the board, please see below.
[DETAILS]
== Labs Statistics ==
- new: 1
- status changes (last 3 months): 14 (see 'Housekeeping')
- total number: 33
- active: 11
- idle: 15
- promoted: 3
- completed: 3
- labs with commits: magma, penihip, jaxMas, mouse
== New Labs =
oak (PI: Jukka Zitting): No, not a re-implementation of ancient Java,
but "HTTP-based hierarchical resource store", written in JS and Clojure.
== Re-activated labs ==
None.
== Housekeeping, Status changes ==
During the last quarter, we identified all labs with no activity for at
least one year.
We notified their PIs and - after a vote - changed all their stati to
idle, if the PI hadn't himself already taking care of this.
This is why we see a lot of labs going to 'idle' this quarter. Here's
the list:
errbase, dworker, mboxer, dislocate, speedyfeed, apiary, agora, nucleus,
discordia, boardcast, webarch, badca, clouds, pinpoint
We fixed some DOAP files, too.
== Status overview page ==
Tim Williams coded a script to generate a nice labs status overview
available at http://s.apache.org/labs_tim
== Community ==
We welcome Tim Williams to the PMC.
== (No) Releases ==
A lab can't do a release, and we all accept and understand this. More
precisely, according to the project's bylaws, the PMC can't vote on a
release.
On the other hand, committers working on a lab might want to cut
releases, either for use outside of the ASF, or simply to signal a
certain level of maturity to attract others to the project. For me this
makes perfectly sense. I don't think it makes sense to work on a lab
without ever wanting to make other people aware of it and make them use
it in one way or the other.
So it was discussed on our dev ML if private releases are a way to do
this, meaning the PI or any other person takes the code, tars it up and
calls it a release, without having a Lab PMC vote, and without tagging
it "Apache".
Now, we'd like to hear the board's general position on this topic,
especially any corner cases and gotchas we have to take into account.
Thanks for any feedback.
== Lab hacking ==
Same as last quarter: Development activity was low last quarter, mailing
list conversations on coding-related topics practically non-existent.
=end of report=
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
