I mocked up a little something on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718.
Kenn On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. It is > also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a list of current > and proposed initiatives? > > I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer individual, > per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way they are easy to > maintain by respective contributors. > > Thanks > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look >> like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask >> for. It might be an incremental improvement on >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more >> for users, to just give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam >> Python on Flink would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried >> at https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status. >> >> Kenn >> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the >>> impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and >>> when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals >>> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of >>> initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or >>> ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a >>> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction? >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS >>>> projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here >>>> are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any >>>> project you can think of that might be interesting examples. >>>> >>>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not >>>> do timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, >>>> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into >>>> roadmaps for sub-bits. >>>> >>>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though) >>>> - >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan >>>> - >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals >>>> >>>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable >>>> format): >>>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html >>>> >>>> Apache Apex >>>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html >>>> >>>> Apache Calcite Avatica >>>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html >>>> >>>> Apache Kafka >>>> - >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan >>>> >>>> Tensorflow >>>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap >>>> >>>> Kubernetes >>>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones >>>> >>>> Firefox >>>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap >>>> >>>> Servo >>>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap >>>> >>>> Bazel >>>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html >>>> >>>> Kenn >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson < >>>> timrobertson...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Kenn, >>>>> >>>>> I think this is a very good idea. >>>>> >>>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those >>>>> who need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get >>>>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@ >>>>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a >>>>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification. >>>>> >>>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without >>>>> mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid. >>>>> >>>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras >>>>> for more detail and to help show transparent progress >>>>> >>>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important >>>>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos >>>>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the >>>>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style? >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important >>>>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the >>>>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Great idea, Kenn! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the >>>>>>> page from the web site. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an >>>>>>> idea of >>>>>>> what to expect. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of >>>>>>> features and >>>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months) >>>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org >>>>>>> > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> a écrit : >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Hi all, >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] >>>>>>> in the >>>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I >>>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives >>>>>>> (ongoing >>>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that >>>>>>> we had >>>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4]. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> > be on it: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for >>>>>>> users? >>>>>>> > - Where should it be presented? >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web >>>>>>> site, >>>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on >>>>>>> first, >>>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In >>>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> > list varies widely. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to >>>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Kenn >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > [1] >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>> > [2] >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>> > [3] >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>> > [4] >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>
