Mailing-List: contact bloodhound-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gary.martin@wandisco.com
 designates 209.85.216.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJSKAsh_0RsAUASM9s7V47s0+n_AA+tU=QY=owNTHWMcETqrwQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20121201152616.D2A73D8C0@minotaur.apache.org>
	<CAKoya927iLnOFWGDP3D0guZLYCBVurhae2=-mva7JN3jEx0ihA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BC821F.6030809@wandisco.com>
	<CAJSKAsi59dWUrs3UxF=Hn8U2oNxWax=XJPZ_2RFeCmdwCRhqYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BC9D79.6050205@wandisco.com>
	<50BCE700.2030702@wandisco.com>
	<CAKoya92NfV71r+QGwOGGGifF9zGHdUJb0MvjLmGRrKsZz2=r5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJSKAsh_0RsAUASM9s7V47s0+n_AA+tU=QY=owNTHWMcETqrwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 18:42:19 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAEZ-ge4B6oNk7fzhfVBecJcQQZW1O_1ATa52j_HDE7W-=h72TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for Dec 2012 ([ppmc])
From: Gary Martin <gary.martin@wandisco.com>
To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016369203a3f7ff7e04cff71ba8

--0016369203a3f7ff7e04cff71ba8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Was I that depressing? :)

I don't mind seeing it become a bit more upbeat on any point, though I
thought it might be best to mention past concerns. I would actually say
that if we knew that we could get through the incubator vote within a week,
I would be very happy with that. It is the uncertainty and lack of
discussion that remains a problem.

It is fine to change points 2 and 3 for new issues if we feel that there is
anything more important.

I am considering bringing up our request to be able to use our repository
browser on our directories in the asf repository as that request does not
look like it has been looked at by infra since August.

Cheers,
    Gary

On 3 December 2012 18:08, Peter Ko=C5=BEelj <peter@digiverse.si> wrote:

> For point 3 we can say it is in progress and showing first results (time
> for 0.3 was significantly shorter than for 0.2) but we are not completely
> there yet.
>
> For point 2, from personal experience, it is not that bad. Setup was fair=
ly
> straightforward but I did miss some documentation on software
> design/architecture and such. Actually Trac's are good enough and maybe w=
e
> should simply point to read-worthy pieces and add some of our own for BH
> code.
>
> I wouldn't mind if we take a bit more optimistic tone with the report :)
>
> Peter
>
> On 3 December 2012 18:59, Joachim Dreimann <joachim.dreimann@wandisco.com
> >wrote:
>
> > It's a good starting point, but I don't think point 2 and 3 are actuall=
y
> > significant issues anymore (assuming release 0.2 was a blip and
> considering
> > the 'starter' tag).
> >
> > Getting people to use the software is the biggest issue I see. That's t=
he
> > only way we'll increase diversity too, as Brane pointed out before. The
> > lack of a demo instance for us to show people interested in using it ho=
w
> it
> > works would be my number 2 issue.
> >
> > - Joe
> >
> >
> > On 3 December 2012 17:53, Gary Martin <gary.martin@wandisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the patience. I'll put the following on the incubator wiki
> > > shortly to use as a starting point for our report:
> > >
> > >
> > > Bloodhound is an issue tracker derivative of Trac, with the goal of
> > making
> > > deployment easy, and usage intuitive.
> > >
> > > Bloodhound has been incubating since December 2011.
> > >
> > > The top three issues that need to be addressed to move toward
> graduation
> > > are:
> > >
> > >   1. Improve community diversity
> > >   2. Lowering the barrier to entry and development
> > >   3. Establish a frequent release cycle
> > >
> > > Since the last report, Bloodhound has gone through two release votes.
> The
> > > problems highlighted in the September report, regarding the use of an
> > > external
> > > site for the download of some of the dependencies, have been largely
> > > solved by
> > > working with their maintainers to ensure that their packages are
> > available
> > > through a standard location (pypi).
> > >
> > > Releases themselves are beginning to become a little more routine
> > although
> > > the
> > > time between the initiation of the vote for release of 0.2.0 and the
> > > subsequent announcement of the result was of concern.
> > >
> > > Three new committers have been added to the project and they have
> driven
> > > considerable conversation on the mailing lists in a relatively short
> > time.
> > > The
> > > barriers to contributors appear to have been reduced but progress in
> this
> > > area
> > > needs to be consolidated with improvements to documentation to help
> > > potential
> > > contributors.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 03/12/12 12:39, Gary Martin wrote:
> > >
> > >> The reports that Joe pointed out were good:
> > >>
> > >>     For inspiration, our two most recent reports can be found here:
> > >>     http://wiki.apache.org/****incubator/September2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/**incubator/September2012>
> > >> <http:/**/wiki.apache.org/incubator/**September2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2012>
> > >> >
> > >>     http://wiki.apache.org/****incubator/June2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/**incubator/June2012>
> > >> <http://**wiki.apache.org/incubator/**June2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/June2012>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> There is a Bloodhound report embedded in each of those.
> > >>
> > >> It is quite possible for one of us to write it and then for others t=
o
> > >> modify it with additional details. I'll be very happy to start it of=
f
> if
> > >> nobody else has started work on it within a few hours.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >>     Gary
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 03/12/12 12:20, Peter Koz(elj wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Have never seen this report before so I am not sure what the
> > expectations
> > >>> are but from the reminder email I am guessing that at least some
> level
> > of
> > >>> historical perspective is needed for a well written one.
> > >>>
> > >>> I am willing to help or contribute to this anyway I can. Where can =
I
> > look
> > >>> for old reports?
> > >>>
> > >>> Peter
> > >>>
> > >>> On 3 December 2012 11:42, Gary Martin<gary.martin@wandisco.**com<
> > gary.martin@wandisco.com>>
> > >>>  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>  Interesting.. I was thinking of doing the report this time but it =
is
> > >>>> always interesting to get a new view.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I assume that we will have officially released 0.3 by the end of t=
he
> > day
> > >>>> but I do not know whether we consider ourselves to have effectivel=
y
> > >>>> established the frequent release cycle yet. Also, do we feel that =
we
> > >>>> have
> > >>>> gone any way towards lowering the barriers to entry & development?
> How
> > >>>> have
> > >>>> the new committers found this area?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I don't think that we can claim to have significantly improved the
> > >>>> community diversity at this stage.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Anyway, whoever is going to do the report, I suggest that the
> addition
> > >>>> of
> > >>>> three new committers is referred to, along with the releases up to
> > >>>> 0.3.0.
> > >>>> Also I would probably mention that we have gone some way to
> mitigating
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> problems identified in the September report by working with the
> > >>>> developers
> > >>>> of some of our dependencies to make sure that code is available
> > through
> > >>>> pypi.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>      Gary
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 03/12/12 10:30, Joachim Dreimann wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  Past reports have usually been written by either Gary or me, does
> any
> > >>>>> of
> > >>>>> the newer contributors want to have a go at this? The deadline is
> in
> > >>>>> two
> > >>>>> days (Wednesday 5th).
> > >>>>> I'll be happy to assist with editing.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> For inspiration, our two most recent reports can be found here:
> > >>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/****incubator/September2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/**incubator/September2012>
> > >>>>> <http:/**/wiki.apache.org/incubator/**September2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2012>
> > >>>>> >
> > >>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/****incubator/June2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/**incubator/June2012>
> > >>>>> <http://**wiki.apache.org/incubator/**June2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/June2012>
> > >>>>> >
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 1 December 2012 15:26, Marvin<no-reply@apache.org>  wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>  Dear podling,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apac=
he
> > >>>>>> Incubator PMC.
> > >>>>>> It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare
> your
> > >>>>>> quarterly
> > >>>>>> board report.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 19 December 2012, 10:00:=
00
> > >>>>>> PST.
> > >>>>>> The report
> > >>>>>> for your podling will form a part of the Incubator PMC report. T=
he
> > >>>>>> Incubator PMC
> > >>>>>> requires your report to be submitted 2 weeks before the board
> > >>>>>> meeting, to
> > >>>>>> allow
> > >>>>>> sufficient time for review and submission (Wed, Dec 5th).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please submit your report with sufficient time to allow the
> > incubator
> > >>>>>> PMC,
> > >>>>>> and
> > >>>>>> subsequently board members to review and digest. Again, the very
> > >>>>>> latest
> > >>>>>> you
> > >>>>>> should submit your report is 2 weeks prior to the board meeting.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The Apache Incubator PMC
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Submitting your Report
> > >>>>>> ----------------------
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Your report should contain the following:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>    * Your project name
> > >>>>>>    * A brief description of your project, which assumes no
> knowledge
> > >>>>>> of
> > >>>>>> the
> > >>>>>> project
> > >>>>>>      or necessarily of its field
> > >>>>>>    * A list of the three most important issues to address in the
> > move
> > >>>>>> towards
> > >>>>>>      graduation.
> > >>>>>>    * Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might
> wish/need
> > >>>>>> to be
> > >>>>>> aware of
> > >>>>>>    * How has the community developed since the last report
> > >>>>>>    * How has the project developed since the last report.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This should be appended to the Incubator Wiki page at:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>     http://wiki.apache.org/****incubator/December2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/**incubator/December2012>
> > >>>>>> <http://**wiki.apache.org/incubator/**December2012<
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2012>
> > >>>>>> >
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Note: This manually populated. You may need to wait a little
> before
> > >>>>>> this
> > >>>>>> page is
> > >>>>>>         created from a template.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Mentors
> > >>>>>> -------
> > >>>>>> Mentors should review reports for their project(s) and sign them
> off
> > >>>>>> on
> > >>>>>> the
> > >>>>>> Incubator wiki page. Signing off reports shows that you are
> > following
> > >>>>>> the
> > >>>>>> project - projects that are not signed may raise alarms for the
> > >>>>>> Incubator
> > >>>>>> PMC.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Incubator PMC
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Joe Dreimann
> > UX Designer | WANdisco <http://www.wandisco.com/>
> > *
> > *
> > *Transform your software development department. Register for a free SV=
N
> > HealthCheck <http://go.wandisco.com/HealthCheck-Sig.html> *
> >
>

--0016369203a3f7ff7e04cff71ba8--