On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Chris Nauroth <cnaur...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > As a Concerted mentor, I agree with the concern about lack of activity. I > think this was a difficult month for the project considering both the > general drop in participation and the typical drop in activity that we > should expect to happen around the end-of-year holidays. The monthly > reporting schedule implicitly requires that an incubating project show > some kind of demonstrable progress month-to-month. Still, other podlings > did manage to sustain activity and complete a report during this time. > > I see John has already raised concern about lack of activity in the > mentor/shepherd notes. I just seconded that myself. > > Can we consider giving the PPMC a chance to reset and aim to re-establish > steady activity this month? What is the steady activity requirement that has been injected into incubation? There are plenty of examples of projects that have enjoyed months and some years of lull between bursts of activity, usually around new requirements and interests by patch submittors or committers. By this reconning, there have been a number of times measured in weeks or months that the httpd and tomcat projects should have been folded. Do we really believe that a steady state of activity is healthy? On the contrary, it is the bursts of new activity that lead our projects into new and interesting territory, not an n commits/mo target. That said, we don't want podlings to linger here; release early, release often, demonstrate that new contributors are recognized as committers/[p]pmc members, and show us [incubator] that there isn't much more mentorship required for the effort to proceed in the model of the ASF. A project that cannot get to a point of release in some reasonable time, e.g. a year or two, or who takes down their shingle and announces they can't attract a three+ community to sustain their effort, such projects should be retired.
