Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D58A200CAD for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:16:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 3C37A160BF7; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:46 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 8021A160BE8 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:16:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 53296 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2017 16:16:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@fluo.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@fluo.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@fluo.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 53285 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jun 2017 16:16:44 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:44 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id DD72C1A08D1 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.522 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.522 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M4mWCX2aAy5u for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with SMTP id 964DD5F295 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 53270 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jun 2017 16:16:40 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:40 +0000 Received: from mail-ua0-f173.google.com (mail-ua0-f173.google.com [209.85.217.173]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id BA70D1A00A2 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ua0-f173.google.com with SMTP id w19so20054761uac.0 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:16:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOwwlwHiEQVUU2ztGW79Wlumscc6dFkH3fjpIOekWFzC/N7o8aJz Kzjd2Haaj+FbACthsgJLquKCwfb3Tw== X-Received: by 10.159.60.162 with SMTP id s34mr6785302uai.89.1498666597026; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:16:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5e05e0ce-2d71-3a51-8b2e-80376141ee76@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <5e05e0ce-2d71-3a51-8b2e-80376141ee76@apache.org> From: Christopher Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:26 +0000 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Graduation To: dev@fluo.incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403043641f0271488055307825d" archived-at: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 16:16:46 -0000 --f403043641f0271488055307825d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:23 AM Josh Elser wrote: > On 6/26/17 6:27 PM, Christopher wrote: > > I think it would be in Fluo's best interests to start the graduation > > process. We've added one new committer, and have had several successful > > releases. I think it's clear that the PPMC understands what is required > of > > them from the Foundation and is prepared to meet those requirements. > > > > While I would still be more comfortable with more committers coming on > > board, I don't think this is a blocker for graduation. Given the niche > > nature of Fluo, it is going to be hard to attract new committers no > matter > > what stage we are in (incubation or TLP). I don't think this is > reflective > > of its ability to survive as a TLP. What matters is that we understand > how > > to add new committers when they do come and there isn't much left to > learn > > from incubation. > > > > What does the rest of the PPMC think about applying for graduation? > > Can't argue with that logic. I'd say Fluo is more like niche on top of > niche. I don't recall seeing any chatter on general@incubator on the > subject of "expected community size" nor have I looked through > graduations that define how many committers are added. > > Anyways, I'm hesitant on graduation given the small, close-knit > community, but have no concern with those members running a successful TLP. > I share the concern on the small close-knit community, and I think that's something we'd have to keep working on as a TLP, and a line item to be covered in our regular board reports as a TLP. I just don't see incubation as helping with that any time soon. --f403043641f0271488055307825d--