...
- Would like to see clearer description of process: make it public enough that people can see what's happening, how to get involved and how you see the process to be managed. For example, it seems the Foundation already committing resources to Sakai 3, need to look meaningfully at K2, eg, ... documenting clearly about what's going on
- Would it be asking too much to ask people to list rough timeline?
- Arriving at a credible timeline may be what they're trying to get into incubation for in the first place: to recruit resource, flesh out a project plan
What Happens Projects that go dormant in Incubation?:
- Useful to set some sort of deadline on incubation period. Concerned about corpses of incubated projects that never go anywhere, need somehow to keep that from going on indefinitely
- One strategy: just a clear statement of how it will get out of incubation. Helps the question of timeline.
- That can help, but then people might be pulled off the project, etc. starts to create clutter that is confusing
- Clutter as such not a big worry. Helpful to see clutter that has good information in it. Worried more about zombie projects that have nothing going on.
- Right, the issue is misinformation; a project in incubation may be dead, whereas we want incubation to be a sign of community activity
- Apache has "the attic" as a way to shelve things that go dormant
- It may be part of the PC role to review and determine whether a project should continue in incubation
- This triggers a thought about apache. They have an interesting model of getting regular status reports. Clay might give an update, could be helpful to identify where projects are running into trouble. Could be very brief report, a paragraph or so
- needs to be more frequent than annually, and a lack of reports is a good indicator
...
- nagging desire to see us document requirements, and want to get drafts going for further stages, and see those take shape.
- Max, Nate and Eli ready to help edit results of discussion.
- got a good starting point. even if only see preliminary thinking, something for the community to begin to reckon againstseems like this is a decent time, but must be inconvenient for Stephen and John. Stephen: ok if it's not too frequent, like once a month or something. easier to plan for regular mtg. conclusion: bi-weekly slot allocation that we wouldn't always use. If an agenda doesn't come together, Clay will coordinate it being called off.