(or what are the criteria for a project to be moved back to Incubation? to a lab?)
Approved Resolution 4 (TSC 07/25/2019):
Until projects are moved to Deprecated or EOL they can stay in Incubation or Active status for an unlimited amount of time.
Until projects are moved to Deprecated or EOL they can stay in Incubation or Active status for an unlimited amount of time.
6 Comments
Arnaud J Le Hors
Shawn Amundson
Projects should never move backwards in the lifecycle, because it would be hard for companies to rely upon projects if that is the case. It's not clear that pushing a project back to labs wouldn't be similar to declaring EOL.
Also, labs should be about grooming projects to be proposed, and not a graveyard for older projects.
Arnaud J Le Hors
Given the lack of consensus on moving projects back in any way I have amended the proposed resolution to essentially leave projects where they are indefinitely.
Hart Montgomery
There might be small-ish projects that never have the momentum to move to active status (maybe the number of contributors isn't high enough, for instance) but that are used by many people in the community. These would presumably be stuck in incubation forever.
I'd almost rather scrap the active/incubation status and instead provide some kind of metric of community support behind the project. This is essentially what active/incubation is attempting to measure. Do we market active projects any differently from incubated ones? It seems to me that the only thing we are doing with active/incubation designations is telling people what the TSC thinks of the community support of the project. There may be more effective and descriptive ways to do this than a rather obtuse binary tag.
Arnaud J Le Hors
Interesting observation! You're right, that is indeed what Incubation vs Active come down to and these may not be fully adequate names for what they mean in our case. I'm not sure what else we'd use though.
Hart Montgomery
We could have less binary metrics. Things like number of contributors, distribution of contributors across companies, distribution of "major" contributors across companies, etc. Unless there are marketing rules tied to active/incubation status, I'm just not sure that we gain too much by having it. Making the public aware of the community effort behind the project in the form of easily accessible metrics would seem to accomplish what the status currently does and save the TSC a lot of headaches.
Dan Middleton
Active status also requires things like CII. It is a reflection of the maturity of the people and processes.
I support the current* resolution (which is maybe a no-op) that we do not move projects backwards in the lifecycle.
*current = "Until projects are moved to EOL they can stay in Incubation or Active status for an unlimited amount of time."
Hart Montgomery
We already display the CII in the wiki (in addition to the active/incubation status). My point is that displaying other things like this may supplant the need for active/incubation.