incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <>
Subject Re: Podlings & Apache Project Maturity Model (was RE: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache RocketMQ from podling to TLP)
Date Mon, 04 Sep 2017 14:48:12 GMT
Hi Bertrand,

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:54 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <> wrote:

> Hi John,
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:11 PM, John D. Ament <>
> wrote:
> > ...Its unfair for us to put some stake in the ground expecting podlings
> to
> > match up 100% on the questions.  Many of the questions are subjective -
> is
> > the code easy to discover? respond to bug reports in a timely manner?...
> Ok, I think I understand your reluctance now: you don't want us to set
> a gate for graduating podlings that many TLPs might not pass.
I'm not sure how you got that from a comment about the subjective nature of
something of the questions, but sure, that's definitely one problem.  I'll
also take this time to note that it is not easy to discovery the source
code for the com dev website, nor the actual contents of the APMM webpage.

> I agree with that, and although I'm a strong supporter of the Maturity
> Model (having initiated it that's understandable ;-) I'm totally ok
> with podlings graduating without fullfilling all of its requirements.
> In my view the model is:
> 1) A good tool to help discover areas that podlings might have neglected.


> 2) A good tool to help podlings look at where they stand, and what
> they might still need to improve after graduation.

Yes, and in a way to reflect upon their current state and see if it's going
well or not.

> 3) A good tool to express our ideal way of doing things, in a concise
> way, and evolve that definition over time.

Its also of use to look at an incoming podling and ask "are these things
you're interested in achieving?"

> Based on this I will continue to push for podlings to come to
> graduation with a self-assessment based on that model.
> OTOH I'm fine with us clarifying that it's not a requirement.
The website already lists it as a recommendation only, not a requirement (I'm
waiting on the build to fix the link).

> -Bertrand
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message