On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: > On Monday, April 30, 2012 08:08:51 PM Kevin Kluge wrote: >> OK, I just added that as a fourth issue. Thanks. > > As Brett stated, please do not constrain yourself with the template. > That's the minimal set of information that is asked. Projects are > encouraged to provide a more details if they feel it's warranted. > > Specifically for Cloudstack, I'd suggest adding a paragraph just before the > list of issues that describes the state of the community. Nothing major at > all. Something like: > > ------------- > Cloudstack just entered the incubator a couple of weeks ago. Since then, > the mailing list has been setup and discussions have started to move to > there with several "new names" participating due to the new Apache location. > Currently, the code repository is still at Citrix, but the community is > looking forward to getting that moved to Apache as soon as possible. > ------------ > > Basically, the list of issues is just that, a list of issues. While the > issues are important, I'd normally like to see the POSSITIVE things going > on in the community as well. I haven't followed the development closely, > has anyone submitted a new patch? This early, that would be a good thing. > > Not a big deal as the current report covers the minimum requirements, but I > usually hate aiming for the minimum. :-) > > Dan > > > >> >> -kevin >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Brett Porter [mailto:br...@porterclan.net] On Behalf Of Brett >> > Porter Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 6:01 PM >> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> > Subject: Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for May 2012 ([ppmc]) >> > >> > On 01/05/2012, at 4:34 AM, Kevin Kluge wrote: >> > > I haven't seen changes to our board report in a few days. Can we get >> > > one> >> > of the mentors to sign off on it? >> > >> > I'll take a look. >> > >> > > We could discuss the "top 3" issues blocking graduation. I wish we >> > > could> >> > do 4. I'd like to add that we need to remove the non-ASF-approved >> > license code from the project as it's clearly a blocker. But, I felt >> > that getting a development process defined was a prerequisite to that, >> > so I omitted the license issue and left the development process in >> > place. >> > >> > Please don't feel constrained by the "template", which is only there to >> > make sure important information isn't omitted. Add anything you think >> > is relevant to the status of the podling. >> > >> > - Brett >> > >> > -- >> > Brett Porter >> > br...@apache.org >> > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ >> > http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter >> > http://twitter.com/brettporter > -- > Daniel Kulp > dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >
I added an overview section with a paragraph dealing with general state of things. Thanks, --David
