Initial stab at a project proposal process #3
Conversation
We will have two stages: incubating and graduated.
|
RFC @cdfoundation/toc |
PROJECT_PROPOSAL_PROCESS.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| **Definition** | ||
|
|
||
| The Incubation Stage is for projects that are interested and have identified a growth plan for doing so. Incubation Stage projects will receive mentorship from the TOC and are expected to actively develop their community of contributors, governance, project documentation, and other variables identified in the growth plan that factor in to broad success and adoption. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This sentence sounds a little awkward. Projects that are interested (in) what?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I took a stab at clarifying this. Thanks for pointing it out!
PROJECT_PROPOSAL_PROCESS.md
Outdated
| * Have a healthy number of committers from at least two organizations. A committer is defined as someone with the commit bit; i.e., someone who can accept contributions to some or all of the project. | ||
| * Explicitly define a project governance and committer process. This is preferably laid out in a GOVERNANCE.md file and references a CONTRIBUTING.md and OWNERS.md file showing the current and emeritus committers. | ||
| * Have a public list of project adopters for at least the primary repo (e.g., ADOPTERS.md or logos on the project website). | ||
| * Other metrics as defined by the applying Project during the application process in cooperation with the TOC. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What are examples of some of these metrics?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Next steps are to share how Jenkins/other existing projects currently track metrics and discuss improving/collaborating/unifying these.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we could easily have devstats run against applying projects and use that a a baseline https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/53/projects-health?orgId=1
|
Thanks @caniszczyk. I also added some questions/comments for discussion. Should there also be a note somewhere that says the documented can be amended with approval from the TOC? |
PROJECT_PROPOSAL_PROCESS.md
Outdated
| * Adherence to the foundation's IP Policy | ||
| * Upon acceptance, At Large projects must list their status prominently on their website/README | ||
| * Development of a growth plan, to be done in conjunction with their project mentor(s) at the TOC. | ||
| * Document that it is being used successfully in production by at least two independent end users which, in the TOC’s judgement, are of adequate quality and scope. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
regarding this:
it is being used successfully in production by at least two independent end users
what is "end-users" and "production" in this context?
- are other open source communities seen as end-users?
- are their systems that run CI/CD and serve their communities seen as production?
or is end-user more like a traditional end user/customer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
end users are folks who use the software in production (whether it's through a service or own their own, it's not a vendor), other open source communities can be seen as end users
|
Also, would it be more accurate to call this is Project Lifecycle document? The project proposal is just one part of it. |
Yes you're right, we will do that :) |
PROJECT_PROPOSAL_PROCESS.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| To graduate from Incubating status, a project must meet the Incubation stage criteria plus: | ||
|
|
||
| * Have a defined governing body of at least 5 or more members (owners and core maintainers), of which no more than 1/3 is affiliated with the same employer. In the case there are 5 governing members, 2 may be from the same employer. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit more prescriptive than the cncf graduation criteria. AFAICT they only require projects to have clear and documented governance.
Do we need these extra stipulations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll take a stab at simplifying this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added a commit to address this.
PROJECT_PROPOSAL_PROCESS.md
Outdated
| * Adherence to the foundation's IP Policy | ||
| * Upon acceptance, At Large projects must list their status prominently on their website/README | ||
| * Development of a growth plan, to be done in conjunction with their project mentor(s) at the TOC. | ||
| * Document that it is being used successfully in production by at least two independent end users which, in the TOC’s judgement, are of adequate quality and scope. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
end users are folks who use the software in production (whether it's through a service or own their own, it's not a vendor), other open source communities can be seen as end users
PROJECT_PROPOSAL_PROCESS.md
Outdated
| * Have a healthy number of committers from at least two organizations. A committer is defined as someone with the commit bit; i.e., someone who can accept contributions to some or all of the project. | ||
| * Explicitly define a project governance and committer process. This is preferably laid out in a GOVERNANCE.md file and references a CONTRIBUTING.md and OWNERS.md file showing the current and emeritus committers. | ||
| * Have a public list of project adopters for at least the primary repo (e.g., ADOPTERS.md or logos on the project website). | ||
| * Other metrics as defined by the applying Project during the application process in cooperation with the TOC. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we could easily have devstats run against applying projects and use that a a baseline https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/53/projects-health?orgId=1
| * 2 TOC sponsors to champion the project and provide mentorship as needed | ||
| * A presentation at a meeting of the TOC | ||
| * Adherence to the foundation's IP Policy | ||
| * Upon acceptance, At Large projects must list their status prominently on their website/README |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unclear on the use of the 'At Large' term in this case? I've only seen this used when talking about people or roles...
|
this should just be "projects must list their status prominently on their
website/README" - the words "At Large" should be removed :)
…On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 7:16 PM T Hernandez ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In PROJECT_LIFECYCLE.md
<#3 (comment)>:
> +1. Projects that have developed new growth targets or other community metrics for success.
+1. Projects that are looking to create a lifecycle plan (maintainership succession, contributor programs, version planning, etc.)
+1. Projects that need more active support from the Foundation or TOC mentorship in order to reach their goals.
+
+**Expectations**
+
+Projects in the Incubation Stage are generally expected to move out of the Incubation stage over time. Depending on their growth plans, projects may cycle through Incubation or Graduation stage as needed.
+
+**Acceptance Criteria**
+
+To be considered for Incubation Stage, the project must meet the following requirements:
+
+* 2 TOC sponsors to champion the project and provide mentorship as needed
+* A presentation at a meeting of the TOC
+* Adherence to the foundation's IP Policy
+* Upon acceptance, At Large projects must list their status prominently on their website/README
Unclear on the use of the 'At Large' term in this case? I've only seen
this used when talking about people or roles...
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAPSIO7RKDHAYYWAK4RQADPVIAFHA5CNFSM4HDXZGCKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOBYP7QMY#pullrequestreview-236976179>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAPSIJLYHFWBGH6JTXFXMDPVIAFHANCNFSM4HDXZGCA>
.
--
Cheers,
Chris Aniszczyk
http://aniszczyk.org
+1 512 961 6719
|
|
lgtm |
|
4/6 is enough TOC members voting for this to pass I recommend picking a pilot project to test the process and iterate over time |
We will have two stages: incubating and graduated.
Signed-off-by: Chris Aniszczyk caniszczyk@gmail.com