Re: Lets talk graduation
IMHO, whatever brings more attention to the project, and I'm not sure graduation is what this project needs right now. In the end it's just semantics. I'd focus those efforts on getting more work done and having more frequent releases. Hence our proposition to sponsor dev, which still stands. On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > > I think with the addition of two new committers we've made some progress > in community growth. I think we'll have 3.0.3 out the door soon - are there > any other items we think we need to address before looking to graduate? > ~P
Re: Lets talk graduation
As a mentor, it's my job argue with Itamar a bit. It's not just semantics. We don't incubate projects indefinitely. I think that you all are good to go. The transition is not very much work. Please do draft a resolution and conduct a vote in the community, and we can then take it to the incubator PMC. On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote: > IMHO, whatever brings more attention to the project, and I'm not sure > graduation is what this project needs right now. In the end it's just > semantics. > > I'd focus those efforts on getting more work done and having more frequent > releases. Hence our proposition to sponsor dev, which still stands. > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > >> >> I think with the addition of two new committers we've made some progress >> in community growth. I think we'll have 3.0.3 out the door soon - are there >> any other items we think we need to address before looking to graduate? >> ~P
Re: Lets talk graduation
I've gone back and forth on whether I think we're ready for graduation or not. I had always felt like we weren't because the project isn't as active as I'd like it to be. However, I think I've been looking at it wrong. We've got a good enough process and we *have* made progress. If anything, graduating might add an urgency to the project when things get slow, since we'd be an official project and more would be expected. I don't think anybody wants the project to end up like it did last time, before we gave it a reboot. I'm up for starting this process, but I don't want it to take any time away from getting 3.0.3 released. Thanks, Christopher On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > As a mentor, it's my job argue with Itamar a bit. It's not just > semantics. We don't incubate projects indefinitely. I think that you > all are good to go. The transition is not very much work. Please do > draft a resolution and conduct a vote in the community, and we can > then take it to the incubator PMC. > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko > wrote: > > IMHO, whatever brings more attention to the project, and I'm not sure > > graduation is what this project needs right now. In the end it's just > > semantics. > > > > I'd focus those efforts on getting more work done and having more > frequent > > releases. Hence our proposition to sponsor dev, which still stands. > > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Prescott Nasser >wrote: > > > >> > >> I think with the addition of two new committers we've made some progress > >> in community growth. I think we'll have 3.0.3 out the door soon - are > there > >> any other items we think we need to address before looking to graduate? > >> ~P >
Re: Lets talk graduation
I'd say we're ready for graduation. Since I'm not really involved in the coding effort at the moment, I'll work with Prescott on this process. The only reservation I have about graduation is losing or lessening Stefan Bodewig's involvement. He's been really helpful. Can we keep all of our mentors even if we graduate? :) Thanks, Troy On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Christopher Currens wrote: > I've gone back and forth on whether I think we're ready for graduation or > not. I had always felt like we weren't because the project isn't as active > as I'd like it to be. However, I think I've been looking at it wrong. > We've got a good enough process and we *have* made progress. If anything, > graduating might add an urgency to the project when things get slow, since > we'd be an official project and more would be expected. I don't think > anybody wants the project to end up like it did last time, before we gave > it a reboot. > > I'm up for starting this process, but I don't want it to take any time away > from getting 3.0.3 released. > > > Thanks, > Christopher > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Benson Margulies > wrote: > >> As a mentor, it's my job argue with Itamar a bit. It's not just >> semantics. We don't incubate projects indefinitely. I think that you >> all are good to go. The transition is not very much work. Please do >> draft a resolution and conduct a vote in the community, and we can >> then take it to the incubator PMC. >> >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko >> wrote: >> > IMHO, whatever brings more attention to the project, and I'm not sure >> > graduation is what this project needs right now. In the end it's just >> > semantics. >> > >> > I'd focus those efforts on getting more work done and having more >> frequent >> > releases. Hence our proposition to sponsor dev, which still stands. >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Prescott Nasser > >wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> I think with the addition of two new committers we've made some progress >> >> in community growth. I think we'll have 3.0.3 out the door soon - are >> there >> >> any other items we think we need to address before looking to graduate? >> >> ~P >>
Re: Lets talk graduation
I want to clarify that graduation is a somewhat gradual process, and the early parts are not much work. You create a resolution for the board that would establish your project. You conduct a community vote. We conduct an IPMC vote. At the next board meeting, which could then be as much as 30 days later, the board (hopefully) adopts the resolution. *Then* you have actual work to do to move your code and web site and such. On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote: > I'd say we're ready for graduation. Since I'm not really involved in > the coding effort at the moment, I'll work with Prescott on this > process. > > The only reservation I have about graduation is losing or lessening > Stefan Bodewig's involvement. He's been really helpful. Can we keep > all of our mentors even if we graduate? :) > > Thanks, > Troy > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Christopher Currens > wrote: >> I've gone back and forth on whether I think we're ready for graduation or >> not. I had always felt like we weren't because the project isn't as active >> as I'd like it to be. However, I think I've been looking at it wrong. >> We've got a good enough process and we *have* made progress. If anything, >> graduating might add an urgency to the project when things get slow, since >> we'd be an official project and more would be expected. I don't think >> anybody wants the project to end up like it did last time, before we gave >> it a reboot. >> >> I'm up for starting this process, but I don't want it to take any time away >> from getting 3.0.3 released. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Christopher >> >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Benson Margulies >> wrote: >> >>> As a mentor, it's my job argue with Itamar a bit. It's not just >>> semantics. We don't incubate projects indefinitely. I think that you >>> all are good to go. The transition is not very much work. Please do >>> draft a resolution and conduct a vote in the community, and we can >>> then take it to the incubator PMC. >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko >>> wrote: >>> > IMHO, whatever brings more attention to the project, and I'm not sure >>> > graduation is what this project needs right now. In the end it's just >>> > semantics. >>> > >>> > I'd focus those efforts on getting more work done and having more >>> frequent >>> > releases. Hence our proposition to sponsor dev, which still stands. >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Prescott Nasser >> >wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> I think with the addition of two new committers we've made some progress >>> >> in community growth. I think we'll have 3.0.3 out the door soon - are >>> there >>> >> any other items we think we need to address before looking to graduate? >>> >> ~P >>>
Re: Lets talk graduation
On 2012-06-14, Christopher Currens wrote: > I've gone back and forth on whether I think we're ready for graduation or > not. I had always felt like we weren't because the project isn't as active > as I'd like it to be. However, I think I've been looking at it wrong. > We've got a good enough process and we *have* made progress. Absolutely, and I think you are ready to graduate as well. As a response to Itamar: Lucene.Net could get more exposure by becoming a top level project. In particular you could craft a press release together with the ASF's PR folks to celebrate the re-birth. The sponsoring offer is a great thing, IMHO. > I'm up for starting this process, but I don't want it to take any time > away from getting 3.0.3 released. Understood. OTOH if you'd graduate first then 3.0.3 would be an official Apache release and didn't have to wear the "incubating" tag. Your call. If you want to do the 3.0.3 release first, I don't think that will be much of delay as it seems to be around the corner anyway. Stefan
Re: Lets talk graduation
On 2012-06-14, Troy Howard wrote: > The only reservation I have about graduation is losing or lessening > Stefan Bodewig's involvement. He's been really helpful. Can we keep > all of our mentors even if we graduate? :) Thanks. There is no rule that forces ex-mentors to unsubscribe from the ex-podling's mailing lists. 8-) I won't have any binding votes by not being on the PMC, but you can be sure I'll stick around for a while. Stefan
Re: Lets talk graduation
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2012-06-14, Troy Howard wrote: > >> The only reservation I have about graduation is losing or lessening >> Stefan Bodewig's involvement. He's been really helpful. Can we keep >> all of our mentors even if we graduate? :) > > Thanks. > > There is no rule that forces ex-mentors to unsubscribe from the > ex-podling's mailing lists. 8-) > > I won't have any binding votes by not being on the PMC, but you can be > sure I'll stick around for a while. > > Stefan Stefan, Of late, there has been a tendency for podlings without ASF members to adopt one of the mentors onto the PMC to provide more continuity. I've ended up on several that way. I'm at capacity for this job, so I'd propose that you do it for this project. The next step after that is to nominate the PMC chair for membership, and then one can make a graceful exit to Emeritus status :-) --benson
Re: Lets talk graduation
+1 for releasing after graduation, then With some careful PR and our sponsorship offer, we can get the project flying There's still some work to do anyway On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2012-06-14, Christopher Currens wrote: > > > I've gone back and forth on whether I think we're ready for graduation or > > not. I had always felt like we weren't because the project isn't as > active > > as I'd like it to be. However, I think I've been looking at it wrong. > > We've got a good enough process and we *have* made progress. > > Absolutely, and I think you are ready to graduate as well. > > As a response to Itamar: Lucene.Net could get more exposure by becoming > a top level project. In particular you could craft a press release > together with the ASF's PR folks to celebrate the re-birth. > > The sponsoring offer is a great thing, IMHO. > > > I'm up for starting this process, but I don't want it to take any time > > away from getting 3.0.3 released. > > Understood. OTOH if you'd graduate first then 3.0.3 would be an > official Apache release and didn't have to wear the "incubating" tag. > Your call. > > If you want to do the 3.0.3 release first, I don't think that will be > much of delay as it seems to be around the corner anyway. > > Stefan > >
Re: Lets talk graduation
On 2012-06-15, Benson Margulies wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2012-06-14, Troy Howard wrote: >>> The only reservation I have about graduation is losing or lessening >>> Stefan Bodewig's involvement. He's been really helpful. Can we keep >>> all of our mentors even if we graduate? :) >> I won't have any binding votes by not being on the PMC, but you can be >> sure I'll stick around for a while. > Of late, there has been a tendency for podlings without ASF members to > adopt one of the mentors onto the PMC to provide more continuity. I've > ended up on several that way. I'm at capacity for this job, so I'd > propose that you do it for this project. Sure, I'll be willing to join the PMC-to-be if the team thinks I'd be of value. Stefan
Re: Lets talk graduation
Stefan, I think you've more than proved your value.
RE: Lets talk graduation
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Graduation+-+Resolution+Template > Stefan, I think you've more than proved your value. +1
Re: Lets talk graduation
Thanks Prescott. I noticed that we need to elect someone as Chair/VP for the project, someone to be a representative for our collective PMC to the board. Unless I'm mistaken, the job entails the quarterly report to the board and communication with the board when a new PMC member is added or the chair is being changed. Looking through the history of board reports we've done in the incubator, I've noticed that Prescott has largely been the one to put those together in a timely fashion. Since Prescott has always been an active member as well, I think he's an ideal candidate for the roll as VP for Lucene.NET. It doesn't seem much different from the role he's already been involved in. Any objections? Thanks, Christopher On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Graduation+-+Resolution+Template > > Stefan, I think you've more than proved your value. > > +1 >
Re: Lets talk graduation
I concur. On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Christopher Currens wrote: > Thanks Prescott. > > I noticed that we need to elect someone as Chair/VP for the project, > someone to be a representative for our collective PMC to the board. Unless > I'm mistaken, the job entails the quarterly report to the board and > communication with the board when a new PMC member is added or the chair is > being changed. Looking through the history of board reports we've done in > the incubator, I've noticed that Prescott has largely been the one to put > those together in a timely fashion. Since Prescott has always been an > active member as well, I think he's an ideal candidate for the roll as VP > for Lucene.NET. It doesn't seem much different from the role he's already > been involved in. Any objections? > > Thanks, > Christopher > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Graduation+-+Resolution+Template >> > Stefan, I think you've more than proved your value. >> >> +1 >>
RE: Lets talk graduation
I thought we were going to force Stefan to do it ;) - or was that something else? Sent from my Windows Phone From: Christopher Currens Sent: 6/15/2012 1:45 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lets talk graduation Thanks Prescott. I noticed that we need to elect someone as Chair/VP for the project, someone to be a representative for our collective PMC to the board. Unless I'm mistaken, the job entails the quarterly report to the board and communication with the board when a new PMC member is added or the chair is being changed. Looking through the history of board reports we've done in the incubator, I've noticed that Prescott has largely been the one to put those together in a timely fashion. Since Prescott has always been an active member as well, I think he's an ideal candidate for the roll as VP for Lucene.NET. It doesn't seem much different from the role he's already been involved in. Any objections? Thanks, Christopher On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Graduation+-+Resolution+Template > > Stefan, I think you've more than proved your value. > > +1 >
Re: Lets talk graduation
Stephan is VP of EOL Compliance. On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > I thought we were going to force Stefan to do it ;) - or was that something > else? > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > From: Christopher Currens > Sent: 6/15/2012 1:45 PM > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Lets talk graduation > > Thanks Prescott. > > I noticed that we need to elect someone as Chair/VP for the project, > someone to be a representative for our collective PMC to the board. Unless > I'm mistaken, the job entails the quarterly report to the board and > communication with the board when a new PMC member is added or the chair is > being changed. Looking through the history of board reports we've done in > the incubator, I've noticed that Prescott has largely been the one to put > those together in a timely fashion. Since Prescott has always been an > active member as well, I think he's an ideal candidate for the roll as VP > for Lucene.NET. It doesn't seem much different from the role he's already > been involved in. Any objections? > > Thanks, > Christopher > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Graduation+-+Resolution+Template >> > Stefan, I think you've more than proved your value. >> >> +1 >>
