On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 05:54:36PM +0100, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > > On Feb 13, 2013, at 5:02 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 04:49:55PM +0100, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > >> > >> On Feb 13, 2013, at 4:43 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Chip Childers > >>> <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 09:59:39AM -0500, David Nalley wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Chip Childers > >>>>> <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > >>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I started a conversation within cloudstack-private@i.a.o about the > >>>>>> prospect of graduation from the incubator, and have received positive > >>>>>> reactions from everyone that replied. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I wanted to kick off the discussion here on the public list, to see if > >>>>>> anyone has any concerns or objections to us starting down the path of > >>>>>> trying to graduate? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My general impression is that we have come a long way as a community > >>>>>> since CloudStack entered the incubator. While there are still rough > >>>>>> edges > >>>>>> for us to work through over time, we are dealing with our problems > >>>>>> quite > >>>>>> well as a community. The simple reason that I believe we are in a > >>>>>> position to ask to graduate, is that we are no longer getting value > >>>>>> from > >>>>>> the incubation process! That's a good thing, because it means that we > >>>>>> have managed to learn quite a bit about the ASF processes, rules, > >>>>>> methods and preferences. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thoughts, comments, discussion? > >> > >> Are you thinking to do this prior to 4.2 release ? > >> > >> With my individual hat on, I think it might be best to put up a strong 4.2 > >> release and then vote for graduation. It would strengthen our case. > > > > I meant 4.1 > > > So I think that we don't have to tie this to a specific release. We've > > proven that we know how to do the mechanics of an ASF release now (with > > 2 under our belts), and anything we would do to get better at our > > community's release processes are purely for our community to be > > concerned with (assuming that we don't regress in any of our obligations > > as an Apache project). > > > > I also don't think that we really have a case to build. As I indicated, > > the discussion on the private list was positive, and that included > > comments from mentors saying that they felt we were ready. > > > > Ok, I did not get that from your first email, so this is good news. > > > IMO, the decision to ask to graduate should be based on what I believe > > the primary goal of incubation is for a podling (assuming the legal, > > procedural, policy stuff is sorted): Building an "Open and Diverse > > community" [1]. I'd add "the ability to self govern" to that goal. I > > believe that we have achieved this, and, while we will need to > > perpetually work to grow and strengthen the community, we aren't getting > > value from being in the incubator anymore. > > > IMHO we are fine on the "self-govern", there are still rough edges on the > procedures. >
If there's one thing I've learned over the years, it's that no software project is satisfied with it's processes. ;-) They are always going to be a little rough, and we'll always be improving them. My point is that the processes we use, or will use, are an issue for the community to deal with. We aren't getting any special value from being a podling as we work on improving them. > > Directly answering the question about "prior to 4.2": I don't think they > > are related. If we are ready and it happens before 4.2, then great. If > > not, then that should be because our process to graduate just took that > > long. > > > > ok > > > Thoughts? > > > > -chip > > > > [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community > >
