Hi Myrle, Yes, we should start recommending your approach. I am actually for this as normal course and instituting the “pTLP” as the new normal as it is actually makes the PPMC more like a TLP from the start.
Given our current interpretation of rules that An Official Apache Release requires 3 +1 IPMC Votes: (1) If a podling gets the 3 +1 binding votes from their mentors and/or IPMC members on their dev list then they can release and use a [DISCUSS] thread to solicit improvements for the next release rather than have a “useless” second round of voting on general@ (2) If a podling is making an non-Apache Release as they are transitioning to Apache they can use this mechanism to solicit reviews about how close they are to being able to produce an Official Apache Release. (3) If “Unofficial” Apache Releases are allowed on the normal podling Apache Distribution Channels then this [DISCUSS] thread can be used until the podling is ready for an “Official” Apache Release. As I understand it this needs approval from Infrastructure. Allowing this approach brings podlings more quickly into Apache Releases, but has disadvantages like yet another distinction that may be hard to explain. (4) “pTLP” with some lower number of IPMC votes become the approved podling model for producing “Official” Apache Releases. If this is the model then the IPMC would make the 3 +1 IPMC Vote on a podling's most recent releases a clear graduation requirement. Regards, Dave > On Mar 6, 2019, at 8:15 AM, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hey all, > > I've only heard positive feedback on this proposal. It doesn't solve all > our problems, but it would provide a path around some of the bureaucracy. > > Would the other mentors be willing to bring this suggestion to their > podlings? Especially the "young" ones who still need releases outside of > the ASF? > > Best Regards, > Myrle > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:50 AM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Motivation: >> >> Some podlings want or need feedback on their releases before they are >> ready to make official Apache releases. They want to discuss releases that >> are not yet ready for a VOTE, or that they are not sure they are ready for >> a vote. They may wish to make an early release outside of the foundation, >> but still test the ASF waters. They prefer to "fail early, fail often and >> fail forward". [1] >> >> >> Proposal: >> >> Podlings should be able to request feedback by starting a "[DISCUSS]" >> thread instead of a "[VOTE]" thread. Discussion should give podlings >> feedback on what they would need to do to bring their release in line with >> the requirements for graduation to TLP. Podlings will be responsible for >> capturing feedback that they accept in work items for their project. >> Feedback provided in a discussion thread will not block a non-ASF release. >> >> Asking for feedback using this mechanism is not obligatory, but rather a >> service that the incubator offers. >> >> >> Arguments for this proposal: >> >> * It's a very small change which may make it easier to implement than some >> of the "throw it all away and start over" proposals circulating, but... >> * It doesn't prevent us from making other larger changes. >> * It's not a rule. It's an offering of an additional service + an >> incremental reduction in stringency of the incubator. >> * It captures some of the value in what we are doing now while increasing >> the degrees of freedom provided to podlings. >> * It is consistent with our values of transparency, collaboration, >> community, pragmatism, meritocracy, and charity. >> >> Best Regards, >> Myrle >> >> 1.) >> https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/614412-failing-forward-turning-mistakes-into-stepping-stones-for-success >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
