openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bertrand Delacretaz <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] graduation from the incubator
Date Tue, 19 Mar 2019 13:30:32 GMT

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 11:06 PM David P Grove <> wrote:
> ...I'd like to kick off a discussion to assess the project's readiness for
> graduation from the incubator...

Thanks for starting this discussion!

I think OpenWhisk is 99% ready to graduate and I'm looking forward to
that, it's a great project with a great community.

With my incubation mentor hat on, I think the role of the project's
communications channels needs to be clarified before graduating. It is
easy to get the impression that the vast majority of the project's
business happens on Slack - maybe it's not really the case but I think
having guidelines for how to use the various communications channels
will help convince the Incubator that the project is following the
Apache principles of inclusive communication.

The ultimate goal of this is to promote the long-term health of the
project by making sure things happen in the open and people can
contribute in an asynchronous way, without having to be engaged
full-time in the project.

Quoting Mark Thomas (from Tomcat fame, current ASF Board Member) from
a recent comdev discussion about this [3] :

> ...The criteria that the ASF looks for in communication channels used by projects are
(in no particular order):
> - open to all
> - asynchronous
> - available off-line
> - full history
> - searchable
> - archived on ASF controlled systems
> - low bandwidth / minimal system requirements ...

I think the current setup used by OpenWhisk can meet these
requirements, but I think one can also come to the conclusion that
Slack is central to the project and one cannot really get involved
without being active there "all the time".

I'm pushing it a bit with such a statement but I think there's some
truth in it, and the best way to demonstrate that it's false is to
create a set of guidelines on how project contributors communicate.
It's probably just a case of clarifying the page which is IMHO a
too-long list of channels without a clear definition of how they
should be used. Doesn't need to be complicated but needs to
demonstrate how these communications follow the Apache principles of
inclusiveness and durability.

Assuming there's a strong preference for Slack vs. this list, which
the current patterns seem to demonstrate, my preferred setup would be:

-Slack is for throwaway near-real-time discussions
-User questions should go somewhere else so as to be archived,
discoverable etc. Stack Overflow maybe? I don't know how much it's
currently used.
-Any "important" technical discussions happen in Git tickets, pull
requests or on this list
-Regular news authored by committers are published on this list (and
maybe also at or, pointing
contributors (especially occasional and new ones) to important
discussions, pull requests etc.

That's just my personal view based on ensuring the sustainability of
this project by exposing all communications in an accessible way.

I'd appreciate the opinion of other mentors on this and I'm open to
discussions about it, but I think clarifying and documenting how the
project uses its various communications channels can be a great help
for occasional and new contributors, which is key to a successful
Apache project.

> ...Per Rodric's recent stats [1], the community has developed nicely in terms
> of code contribution....

The (great) numbers shown there make me think that more people might
be eligible as OpenWhisk committers and PMC members, also in view of
long-term project sustainability. This can happen after graduation but
I think the Incubator will need reassurance that the PMC is actively
looking for new committers and PMC members.


> [1]
> [2]


View raw message