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: [DISCUSS] AOO Ready to Graduate
Date Sun, 19 Aug 2012 22:08:54 GMT
+1 on prerequisites.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2012 09:40
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] AOO Ready to Graduate


On Aug 19, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 17/08/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>>> 
>>> We've had several prods from our mentors suggesting that we are ready
>>> to graduate.
>> 
>> 
>> I agree it would be good to do so, since it will automatically reduce
>> complex and unclear terminology ("incubator", "podling") that has been
>> misused outside the project and it will make governance easier.
>> 
>> 
>>> I'd recommend everyone take a look at this timeline [2] for what the
>>> graduation process looks like.  You can see it is three steps:
>>> 1) Optional Community vote [3]

1.5) Make sure that everything on the status page is checked off.

Someone needs to enter the date of the trademark transfer and the mentors have some check-offs.

>>> 2) Preparation of a Charter and Resolution [4]
>>> 3) Vote by the IPMC to recommend the Charter/Resolution to the ASF Board.
>>> 4) Approval by the ASF Board.
>> 
>> 
>> If the Charter needs to contain complex statements about scope and mission
>> of the project, it will take some time (but this is not the case, if I
>> understand the the examples correctly).
>> 
> 
> It is not clear to me what the charter actually does.  What does it
> mean organizationally?  Does it obligate or constrain the project in
> any formal way?  Or is it just a convenient summary of the project's
> focus?  For example, has anything bad ever happened to any Apache
> project because their charter was too narrow (or too broad)?  If not I
> would not worry too much about it.

The Charter / Board Resolution establishes the PMC.

Here is a recent example from general@i.a.o for Lucene.Net - just now passed by the Board:

> X. Establish the Apache Lucene.Net Project
> 
> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
> interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
> Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
> Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of
> open-source software related to maintaining a .NET platform
> version of the Lucene Indexing Engine for distribution at
> no charge to the public.
> 
> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management
> Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Lucene.Net Project",
> be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the
> Foundation; and be it further
> 
> RESOLVED, that the Apache Lucene.Net
> Project be and hereby is responsible for the creation and 
> maintenance of software related to maintaining a .NET 
> platform version of the Lucene Indexing Engine and be 
> it further
> 


I purposefully used another project as an example. There are two phrases that are important.

(1) "Lucene.Net" - in our case this is "OpenOffice"

(2) "related to maintaining a .NET platform version of the Lucene Indexing Engine" and this
is the phrase that will describe the scope of the project and should be carefully considered
and likely not too narrow.

... likely this should be another thread.

> 
>> It also seems, from the links, that the project will need to elect a chair,
>> and this would be quite time-consuming too.
>> 
> 
> If there is just a single nominee then this is easy.  If we have 2
> nominees, we could have a 72-hour vote.  But if have more than two,
> then we need to think about either a multi-stage voting process (run
> off elections), or a transferable vote system.   But I don't this will
> take much time.  And it could be done in parallel with drafting the
> charter.
> 
> Of course, if no one wants to be Chair, then this can take longer ;-)
> 
>> So I wouldn't be sure that we can have everything ready by the September
>> Board meeting.
>> 
> 
> If we make it by then, great.  If not, then October is a fine month as well.
> 
> Another thing we need to do is determine the membership of the PMC.
> This would likely be the current PPMC, minus those who signed up when
> the podling started but then never actually got involved with the
> project.   I assume we would also want to extend an invitation to any
> Mentors who wish to continue with the project as PMC members.  But
> that can be done in parallel as well.  This all gets wrapped into one
> proposed Resolution: charter, PMC members and PMC Chair.

I think we should decide on the PMC before we decide on the Chair.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob
> 
>> 
>>> I'd like to start the first step, with the optional, but highly
>>> recommended, community vote, stating our belief that we are ready to
>>> graduate.
>> 
>> 
>> I agree. If we have consensus that we are ready to graduate, let's start
>> with a formal vote about it, and then proceed step by step with the process.
>> 
>> Regards,
>>  Andrea.


Mime
View raw message