logging-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Curt Arnold <carn...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Graduation of log4cxx and log4net
Date Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:21:46 GMT
It would be good to review whether the project's meet the exit criteria  
listed in  
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/ 
Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Exit+Requirements.  I'll take a stab for  
log4cxx:


>
> Minimum Exit Requirements
>
> Prior to escalation to the ASF, a Podling needs to show that :
> 	• 	 it is a worthy and healthy project;
> 	• 	 it truly fits within the ASF framework;and
> 	• 	 it "gets" the Apache Way.

I think those statements are true for log4cxx

>
>  This is achieved by imposing a set of Exit Criteria that, when met,  
> will demonstrate these objectives.
>
>  Therefore, to successfully exit the Incubator and be escalated fully  
> into the ASF, a Podling SHALL meet the minimum exit requirements  
> detailed below. The Incubator PMC MAY set additional requirements at  
> their discretion. Such additional requirements MAY be proposed by the  
> Mentor or the Sponsor, however only the Incubator PMC is authorised to  
> formally place such requirements on a Podling.
>
>  The minimum requirements that a Podling SHALL meet prior to being  
> successfully escalated to the ASF are :
> 	• 	 Legal
> 	◦ 	All code ASL'ed

Yes

> 	◦ 	 No non ASL or ASL compatbile dependencies in the code base

log4cxx currently has dependencies on libxml2 and MSXML to support XML  
configuration files.  This is reported as  
http://nagoya.apache.org/jira/browse/LOGCXX-35.  The planned resolution  
is to use Apache Portable Runtime's XML support.


> 	◦ 	 License grant complate
> 	◦ 	 CLAs on file.
> 	◦ 	 Check of project name for trademark issues

I assume all these were done on the way into the incubator.

> 	• 	 Meritocracy / Community
> 	◦ 	Demonstrate an active and diverse development community
> 	◦ 	 The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor  
> (there's at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no  
> single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project)

I think the recent log4cxx mailing list activity indicates that their  
is an active and diverse user community.

There are 3 legally independent committers to log4cxx, however Michaël  
CATANZARITI has stated that he will not be actively participating for  
almost a year.  There have been some submitted patches and some offers  
of development assistance, but I don't have a name that I would  
consider the next to put up for committer status based on a history of  
submissions.  It might be good to consider adding log4j or log4net  
committers to log4cxx and vice-versa.

> 	◦ 	 The above implies that new committers are admitted according to  
> ASF practices

I think Ceki intervened when I was put up for committer status since  
the voting was being done in the wrong place, but I think the intent  
was right.

> 	◦ 	 ASF style voting has been adopted and is standard practice
> 	◦ 	 Demonstrate ability to tolerate and resolve conflict within the  
> community.
> 	◦ 	 Release plans are developed and excuted in public by the  
> community.
> 	▪ 	 (requriment on minimum number of such releases?)
> 	▪ 	 Note: incubator projects are not permitted to issue an official  
> Release. Test snapshots (however good the quality) and Release  plans  
> are OK.

Plans and votes for the upcoming 0.9.8 "snapshot" were held and the  
migration to APR where held on the dev mailing list and I believe  
support these statements.


> 	◦ 	 Engagement by the incubated community with the other ASF  
> communities, particularly infrastructure@ (this reflects my personal  
> bias that projects should pay an nfrastructure "tax").

This is questionable.  Where do I send my estimated infrastructure tax?  
  I haven't seen other ASF communities persuing log4cxx and we are just  
migrating to APR, so haven't had much involvement with them.

> 	◦ 	 Incubator PMC has voted for graduation

I assume this has no happened.

> 	◦ 	 Destination PMC, or ASF Board for a TLP, has voted for final  
> acceptance

I assume this is in progress

> 	• 	 Alignment / Synergy
> 	◦ 	Use of other ASF subprojects

log4cxx is migrating to from its own platform abstraction layer to APR.

> 	◦ 	 Develop synergistic relationship with other ASF subprojects
> 	• 	 Infrastructure
> 	◦ 	CVS module has been created

Yes, though should we consider switching to SVN before graduating?

> 	◦ 	 Mailing list(s) have been created
> 	◦ 	 Mailing lists are being archived

Yes to both

> 	◦ 	 Bugzilla has been created

Jira with 40+ bugs logged.

> 	◦ 	 Project website has been created

Yes

> 	◦ 	 Project ready to comply with ASF mirroring guidlines

Not sure what this means.

> 	◦ 	 Project is integrated with GUMP if appropriate

There is an Ant build and test script for log4cxx, so it would be  
possible to be the first c++ project integrated with GUMP

> 	◦ 	 Releases are PGP signed by a member of the community
> 	◦ 	 Developers tied into ASF PGP web of trust


I don't have a PGP signature that would meet this criteria.


Mime
View raw message