incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: Board report
Date Fri, 08 Jul 2011 19:44:45 GMT
I left the Community section empty on my last clean-up, but I promised to add something today.
 When I do may last "stats" for how we are doing in a little while, I will indicate a brief
summary on what we have accomplished in having folks on-board.

Although it is tempting to talk about what more there is to do, I think I will refrain from
that for something we accomplish before the next report (e.g., still-missing iCALs, having
committers clearly on/not-on the PPMC, and broadening our community beyond the boundaries
of this incubator to other Apache projects and important external, pre-existing efforts).

-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2011 01:57
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Board report

Thank you for putting together you first board report [1]

I've taken a look at it and find it is acceptable in its current form.
However, I do have a couple of comments (as you get to know me more I
nearly always have "a couple of comments")

Incubator reports and TLP board reports are slightly different.
Generally the Incubator reports are "how we are progressing towards
graduation" whereas TLP board reports are more of a "how the community
is functioning". The board is not really interested in any technical
details of a project, that's up to the (P)PMC. What the board cares
about is whether the community is functional or not. For this reason I
tend to encourage podlings to explicitly address some of community
related items in "Most important to address" section. A project will
not graduate until its community is fully functional. The technical
requirement to get a release out, for example, is not really that
important in its own right (although it can be argued that getting a
release out will help build community of course).

I also wonder if getting a release out is more important than getting
the code in SVN or removing licence incompatibilities so that a
release can be made.

Under the "Community Development Progress" heading I think the project
should give itself a pat on the back. We are already starting to see
people becoming conscious about increasing the transparency of the
projects operations. It's not just mentors saying "don't use the
private list" anymore. Perhaps a comment along the line of "initial
committers are already acting upon mentors guidance with respect to
the ASF policy of having everything in public". I suggest this because
the relationship between, for example, IBM and the project is probably
a significant concern for some potential contributors. It also sends a
strong signal that, as a mentor, i would ask for the reverse to be put
into the report if I felt there were a problem.

Of course other mentors may have a different opinion on what should be
on the board report at this time. I'm not insisting on these items
being included. Wait to see what other mentors say before editing
further.

Ross

[1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/July2011

-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com


Mime
View raw message