That is a reasonable response, Evan.
So, let's look at what graduation might look like, then we can see about
what goals might be reasonable:
A podling must have:
1. proven its ability to produce legally correct releases
2. demonstrated its ability to vote in new committers and PPMC members
3. a diverse community
4. sufficient PPMC members to be able to command 3 or more votes on all
important matters,
notably new committers/PPMC members and on releases.
So, the ONE thing this podling needs to do before our next board report
is due is make a release.
This involves these steps:
* prepare a tarball containing the source
* validate that it is (to the best of our knowledge) legally correct
* get at least 3 +1 votes from PPMC members
* submit it to the Incubator PMC for checking
I personally am hesitant to vote on such things as I have limited
experience of release vetting. My holding back should not be considered
as a negative in any way.
The PPMC needs to be able to demonstrate its ability to do this in a
self managed way, i.e. without prodding from mentors.
Note, I don't mention in that list "getting the Incubator PMC to accept
the release". That can sometimes be challenging. But having shown that
this PPMC can (a) produce a release tarball and (b) submit it to the
Incubator PMC having acquired 3 or more +1 votes from PPMC members would
make a big difference in terms of moving us closer to meeting graduation
requirements.
Reasonable?
Upayavira
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015, at 02:01 PM, Evan Hughes wrote:
> maybe instead of deciding the end instead you and Christian set goals
> that
> must be completed by the next checkpoint aka have x amount of submits,
> have
> x more active contributors to help gain momentum. If the tasks are not
> completed sufficiently or dismally fail then sure maybe its for the best.
>
> On 7 October 2015 at 22:44, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well as the video discussion we had earlier this year, the main problem
> > has been the complexity. We have been taking steps in this direction with;
> >
> > * reducing technical debt (removing updating dependencies), can bee seen
> > from patches last week and there has been work in a gradle or sbt build
> > system which allows people to understand how the project works together.
> >
> > I personally have been looking into giving the website a fresh coat of
> > paint in the past couple of weeks (infrastructures docs on building locally
> > are eh if not on a mac ;) but did get it working). We have also had the
> > addition of the android project for wave.
> >
> > Progress might be slow but progress is still being made.
> >
> > On 7 October 2015 at 20:54, Upayavira <upayav...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> I need to sign off the Wave report, but find this difficult.
> >>
> >> The Apache Incubator exists to facilitate projects moving towards being
> >> fully fledged ASF projects. Wave has been
> >> incubating since 2010, and in that time it has not yet been able to
> >> build a community that is likely to sustain itself as an ASF
> >> project.
> >>
> >> It does, therefore, seem to me that it is time for us to retire as a
> >> podling, and allow people here to continue in a location more fitting
> >> with the current level of effort, without the expectation that it needs
> >> to meet some specific set of incubation requirements.
> >>
> >> Note that all of the source code is Apache Licensed, meaning it can be
> >> forked elsewhere - the only discussion required is the name that the
> >> relocated project would take.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> Upayavira
> >>
> >
> >
