shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kalle Korhonen <>
Subject Re: Board report due
Date Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:10:41 GMT
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Les Hazlewood <> wrote:
> As to the comment about the committers, should we flag this in a board
> report yet?  My opinion is that this might stir up things unnecessarily - we
> might resolve it internally before we attempt to graduate, and the IPMC
> wouldn't have needed to been bothered with it.  Or if we should keep it in
> the report, maybe state that we're actively addressing it.

"Resolve it internally?" - Les, you've lived too long in the corporate
world :) The way I see it, we put whatever is important to us in the
report. The only reason then not to put something in there, would be
if the topic wasn't important enough for us to address but the more we
talk about it, the more I think it should be on the report. I think
the paragraph already shows that we actively addressing the issue and
managing the health of the project. I doubt that IPMC is going to be
bothered with it, but in any event, we need to demonstrate that the
PPMC can self-sufficiently manage the whole project other than just
checking in code and that's what mentors are looking for, right? I
doubt the issue with a small number of genuinely active committers is
anything new to the IPMC and Apache in general - at least from what
I've seen, even in the largest and most active projects there's quite
often only a few committers involved in a day-to-day basis. That said,
I won't object if you change/remove the paragraph.

> As for the documentation - I think we're doing well enough in that area for
> the STATUS document.  Sure, it can be improved (it can always be improved),
> but I've heard from others that it is already better than even some
> graduated sites' documentation.  I'm not saying that there isn't a lot hat
> we can still do, but as far as the STATUS is concerned, I think we're good.

Agree 100% and checked it off.


> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Kalle Korhonen <
>> wrote:
>> See the proposed board report at
>> and
>> comment/edit as you like. I'll add it to the board Wiki tomorrow COB.
>> On STATUS, I say we can check this off:
>>  -- Does the documentation site has enough information on the
>> architecure, design decisions and
>>     modules?
>> Kalle
>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Les Hazlewood <> wrote:
>> > Sorry - sent accidentally.  Any blocking items should still be documented
>> in
>> > the status file in SVN - I don't have access to it at the moment...
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Les Hazlewood <>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Kalle,
>> >>
>> >> I haven't started it yet, and will be preoccupied today and tomorrow.
>> >>  Would you mind giving a crack at it?
>> >>
>> >> The only blocking items that I can think of are
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Kalle Korhonen <
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Les & others... just checking in case you've already started writing
>> >>> up the board report that's due on 14th. I'll be happy to do it if
>> >>> nobody's done it. The obvious highlight is 1.0.0 release, let me know
>> >>> if there are other big items that should be mentioned. I suppose we
>> >>> should also mention that project plans to release 1.0.1/1.1.0 and
>> >>> graduate in the next period, right? Any blocking items on the
>> >>> graduation checklist Les?
>> >>>
>> >>> Kalle
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >

View raw message