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 A722F200B68 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:41:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 9E327160AAB; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:24 +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 E5F77160A79 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:41:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 91834 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2016 15:41:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 91823 invoked by uid 99); 19 Aug 2016 15:41:22 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id D575BC0499 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.971 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.971 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ipFx2QQgns9e for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from serval.cherry.relay.mailchannels.net (serval.cherry.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.223.163]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id E18DE5F249 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: a2hosting|x-authuser|himself@orcmid.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3913612853B for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a2s42.a2hosting.com (ip-10-220-3-24.us-west-2.compute.internal [10.220.3.24]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 631E31283E1 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: a2hosting|x-authuser|himself@orcmid.com Received: from a2s42.a2hosting.com (a2s42.a2hosting.com [10.21.150.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.7.6); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:05 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: a2hosting|x-authuser|himself@orcmid.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: a2hosting X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1471621264615:532625187 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1471621264614 Received: from 174-21-52-168.tukw.qwest.net ([174.21.52.168]:33950 helo=Astraendo2) by a2s42.a2hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1balum-0040FX-FP for general@incubator.apache.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:41:01 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Dennis E. Hamilton" To: References: <5113b38e-e52b-0c16-eced-903e00fc4477@apache.org> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: Ease of release process and exit criteria Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 08:41:02 -0700 Organization: NuovoDoc Message-ID: <00fa01d1fa30$18c394a0$4a4abde0$@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQLZsBrE2x3Vhapy6sYRkn+ovAhMawIIsE5XAdJrtnSeIh7/EA== Content-Language: en-us X-AuthUser: himself@orcmid.com archived-at: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:41:24 -0000 +1 to this, including the posts from Mark and Bertrand. I know of a project where this would have made a serious difference for = graduation and subsequent sustainability. - Dennis > -----Original Message----- > From: Shane Curcuru [mailto:asf@shanecurcuru.org] > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 07:08 > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Ease of release process and exit criteria >=20 > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote on 8/19/16 5:57 AM: > > Hi Mark, > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Mark Thomas > wrote: > >> ...I'm thinking of a graduation criteria long the lines of: > >> "Is the release process clearly documented to the point that = someone > new > >> to the project could produce a release build?"... >=20 > +1, this is a critical point to include. We continue to see projects > struggling with releases when early volunteers leave and no-one else > really understands releases. >=20 > ...snip... > > How about also adding an RE50 item to > > https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity- > model.html > > about a repeatable release process? That's a discussion for > > community.a.o but what's your opinion? >=20 > +1, this is both important to include philosophically as well as > practically. I.e. it's an important reminder that project technical > procedures need to be understandable by the *whole* community, not = just > the first few developers who created the project. >=20 > - Shane >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org