Hi Ash, I tend to agree. I would consider a mature project to have demonstrated the ability to, for a prolonged period, produced a collection of developed and exposed capabilities with demonstrable adoption. (in some way shape or form) The details of the metrics for which are for the TSC to determine and coalesce around. The bullet list describes a good starting points for a project to demonstrate to have done so in a consumable and consistent manner.
A scenario on the other hand is a release vehicle, and is not really something that I would think about when considering a projects maturity level. A feature project will likely have at one time or another created or leveraged a scenario to expose features in a release, but that would seem a purely mechanical function for those types of projects. / Chris (feeling tongue tied after typing that lot) From: <[email protected]> on behalf of Ash <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, 3 November 2016 at 13:28 To: Luke Hinds <[email protected]> Cc: TSC OPNFV <[email protected]>, TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] [opnfv-tech-discuss] Graduation reviews discussion I am still under the impression that a graduated project is consistent and consumable. My only concern with the above is that if the emphasis is on scenarios then there's not much value in graduation. I think this actually emphasizes the need for the current effort to lay out the architecture so that we can get back to the concept of a reference platform. Then a graduated project has great value. Just my 2 cents. On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Luke Hinds <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Yujun Zhang <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I think there would be a different expectation for "mature" projects. It is quite difficult to define "fully functional" and "stable" since the projects never stop evolution even after mature. From a developer's view, a mature project can be judged from 1. regular release cycle 2. test coverage 3. documentation completeness 4. security integrity 5. timely response on feedback 6. fluent process on evolution My two cents. +1 security integrity could entail a project being audited (which most already are) and being vulnerability managed: https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=2926046 On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:25 PM Raymond Paik <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: All, One of my action items from the TSC meeting.... We discussed graduation reviews for "mature" projects in OPNFV. On the Project Lifecycle document (https://www.opnfv.org/developers/technical-project-governance/project-lifecycle), a mature project is defined as "Project is fully functioning and stable, has achieved successful releases." One of the questions that was raised on the call was, after graduation how would "mature" projects be different from projects in the "incubation" stage. Is this just a badge/label or are there different expectations? Please discuss :-) Thanks, Ray _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss -- Luke Hinds | NFV Partner Engineering | Office of Technology | Red Hat e: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | irc: lhinds @freenode | m: +44 77 45 63 98 84 | t: +44 12 52 36 2483 _______________________________________________ opnfv-tsc mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tsc
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
