incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Incubator exit criteria
Date Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:38:45 GMT
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 24 Jun 2014, at 21:27, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> >>> On 24 Jun 2014, at 7:24, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> >>> That said, reminding people of the "release often and early" thing is
> >>> good to do,
> >>> but also have in mind that incubator releases are very difficult to
> >>> make.
> >>
> >> Unlike Christian (another Wave mentor :-) ), I am generally in support
> >> of this proposal. If a project cannot get a release out, then it
> >> suggests insufficient weight behind it. Releasing software is what the
> >> ASF is about. It is acceptable that a mature ASF project, one that is
> >> code-complete, doesn't release regularly, but an incubator project would
> >> not fall into that camp, therefore being able to say "we can muster the
> >> resources to make a 'legally valid release' within a year seems
> >> eminently reasonable to me.
> >>
> >
> > https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/an_apache_openoffice_timeline
> >
> > In total, from entering incubation to first release was 11 months and
> > a week.  So this confirms that a year, for most projects should be
> > sufficient.  But there could be exceptions, due to factors similar to
> > those I listed above.  But such exceptions should be rare.
>
> Indeed the OOo was an impressive amount of work.
>
> Reading comments from Upayavira and Rob, I am willing to support
> the "relaxed" proposal of Roman. I would prefer mine, but
> we can always do modifications as we see fit.
>
> As it seems i was the only sceptic, we can try to formulate a patch
> for our policies.
>
>
>
You aren't the only sceptic, i'm not enthusiastic about having such
specific policy about release time frames either. Some projects are just
slow, having a deadline like that could just make them get a release out of
low quality without much care just to tick the box.

Looking at clutch these are the current podlings and age which are older
than a year and have no release:

Aurora         267
BatchEE     265
DeviceMap     904
Kalumet     1009
Ripple         617
Samza         330
Streams     582
Usergrid     265
Wave         1299

Maybe their mentors should just go have a conversation with them about it?

   ...ant

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message