streams-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ate Douma <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Maturity Model Assessment
Date Mon, 10 Apr 2017 19:35:33 GMT
On 2017-04-10 04:09, sblackmon wrote:
> This thread went quiet during and following the 0.5 release, so I’ll try to wrap it
up now.
> If anyone has any last changes they want to make to the AMMA, or want to suggest others
make, prior to initiating a graduation vote, please do so in the next 48 hours.

What happens in 48 hours?

Concerning the AMMA, I read through it again and have several remarks:

- CD20: Link to website is broken (referring to /site/latest/)
         Same goes for a few other website links (RE10, CS10)

- CD30: Somehow it looks to me that a 'howto' build (with) Streams is now more
         fragments/unclear than before. The only practical instructions (for
         users) is now (only?) on the Examples page.
         IMO the "For Users" and "For Developers" menu's really lack an intro
         page *explaining* what to install, and why.

- LC20: It might be useful to list or reference the actual required 3rd party
         dependencies, based upon the latest 0.5 (or 0.5.1) release.

- RE50: points to a release-guide from Apache Beam, not the one from Streams

- QU10: while maybe not the right item to link this to, but as it mentions
         JIRA usage, I'd like to remark the following:

         IMO many/most of the current JIRA tickets are lacking a proper
         description *why* certain tasks/changes should be done.
         While for some this is discussed on the dev list, others are not or
         only minimally so. This makes it really difficult to understand
         what's going on, how 'good' or 'bad' these changes might be (from
         a quality POV for example), and likewise difficult to join/connect
         to the project from community perspective.
         It would be good to improve in this area, and more concretely, maybe
         put this in a documented Coding/Contribution Policy?

- QU20: How / where is this documented/explained? AFAIK it is not, yet.
   QU30  Many projects do have a dedicated page or section explaining how
         security issues are handled.

- QU40: <empty>. Can we say anything about this, for example referring to
         semantic versioning with regards to backwards compatibility handling?

- CO10: Besides relevant remarks above, and a link to the AMMA, a link to the
         wiki itself is missing as well.

- CO20: Contribution guide indeed would be good, IMO needed, to be added.
   CO30  A simple/effective example, or starting point:

The above remarks are mostly strong suggestions for improvements/fixes, and not
all need to be resolved before graduation. But neither should it take a lot of
time to address most of them.


> Thanks,
> On February 22, 2017 at 10:43:17 PM, Joey Frazee ( wrote:
> @suneel + @all I’ll be RM for this. I’ve gone through a dry run of all the release
steps on the current master so should be ready to run it for real tomorrow.
> -joey
> On Feb 13, 2017, 11:26 AM -0600, Suneel Marthi <>, wrote:
>> 0.5-incubating: We are down to about 10 jiras all of which are either
>> process documentation and web site changes. It would be good to have either
>> @MFranklin or @Joey don the Release Meister hats for next release.
>> AMMA: The podling now satisfies most of the line items in AMMA and the few
>> remaining blanks will be addressed in the run up to the next planned
>> release.
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:17 PM, sblackmon <> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> Following up on this thread - completing the Apache Maturity Model
>>> Assessment and proposing graduation.
>>> Thank you Suneel for contributing to the AMMA in December and January.
>>> Everyone else - please take a look and contribute comments or changes in
>>> the document, on this thread, and/or add tickets in JIRA.
>>> This is the time to call out any areas where you think we should make
>>> adjustments prior to a graduation vote.
>>> The plan is to perform 0.5-incubating release by the end of February, so
>>> now is a great time to fit in improvement to POMs and documentation.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Steve
>>> On January 26, 2017 at 12:06:05 PM, sblackmon (
>>> wrote:
>>> Happy 2017 Streams committers and well-wishers.
>>> For those unfamiliar, the Apache Maturity Model Assessment is a
>>> essentially a checklist assessment of project health based on many of the
>>> principles of the Apache Software Foundation.
>>> I’ve started an AMMA for Streams here:
>>> Assessment+for+Streams
>>> All in all, Streams already stacks up pretty well against the ~35 items on
>>> the AMMA. There are some gaps - and opportunities to improve of course.
>>> I think we have reached the point where the project can make a strong case
>>> to graduate to TLP, following a concerted effort to address the gaps that
>>> remain.
>>> So my ask to everyone is:
>>> - review and bookmark the Streams AMMA doc in confluence.
>>> - confirm that you have edit or at least comment privileges. let me know
>>> if you don’t.
>>> - prepare and share notes on any areas of concern to you personally
>>> - identify and share specific ideas that we could act on to improve our
>>> score on any items, especially those where we are falling short of a
>>> definitive YES.
>>> Personally I want to see the project achieve TLP status prior to ApacheCon
>>> NA 2017, after one more major release.
>>> I will respond personally to any feedback on this and future related
>>> threads, and reach out to the list regarding our progress about once a week
>>> from here on out to push us forward.
>>> Thanks in advance for your support.
>>> Steve
>>> On November 25, 2016 at 12:21:50 PM, Steve Blackmon (
>>> wrote:
>>> On Nov 25, 2016 11:58 AM, "Suneel Marthi" <> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for starting this @sblackmon.
>>>> Could we make 2 releases (both releases managed by folks != "sblackmon").
>>>> Since the recent 0.4 release, there have been minor bug fixes and
>>>> performance improvements, we could cut a release in the next one week -
>>>> call it 0.4.1.
>>> I think all of the changes that have merged are suitable for a minor
>>> release. There were changes made to the facebook module translations, but
>>> those had fallen out of sync with the provider to the point that documents
>>> coming out of the 0.4 release providers were missing a ton of useful
>>> informaton. So i think we can make an exception to the a general
>>> preference to not change data schemas in a non-backwards compatible way in
>>> a minor release.
>>> +1
>>>> We do have a planned major release 0.5 for end of December.
>>>> The idea is to have more frequent releases to demonstrate maturity in the
>>>> release process and each release managed by a different Release Meister.
>>> +1
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:35 PM, sblackmon <
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> Last week at ApacheCon EU I attended a walkthrough about the Apache
>>>>> Maturity Model [1]
>>>>> As we close in on graduation, it should be helpful to evaluate the
>>> project
>>>>> against the Maturity Model and work to close any gaps we see.
>>>>> To help start this effort, I’ve created a page on the wiki with a draft
>>>>> assessment, and some notes for discussion in italics.
>>> Apache+Maturity+Model+
>>>>> Assessment+for+Streams
>>>>> Please take a look - if you have thoughts to contribute please do so
>>>>> this thread or edit the wiki page directly (LMK if you need
>>> permissions to
>>>>> view or edit)
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Steve
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> maturity-model.html

View raw message