The way that Apache separates out its "incubator" projects from full projects is that incubation projects are not listed in the main list of Apache projects, but rather on the incubator.apache.org subsite. It might be worth examining an approach like that to make clear the distinction.

C

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 2:06 PM, alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Erin

Thank you. 

What is your question about community support?

Alexis

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, 19:02 Erin Boyd, <eboyd@...> wrote:

Alexis/Dan et all,

I appreciate the work it is to grow this foundation and ensure it lands in a healthy place, it's no small feat!

With the popularity of CNCF, it's 'endorsement' to projects is a huge success factor.

And while I know we are current revamping definitions to provide better understanding of the stages of a project, I think many in the community are concerned that outside of this, perception is reality. Honestly, if I am a potential customer and looking at a project, just having it listed (with a bunch of other projects at different levels) on the CNCF website probably instills a certain amount of confidence in the project.

The criteria between inception to graduation is well documented and understood by the TOC, but outside of that, I am not sure.

Many times it's been brought of that for instance, "community support is not sufficient for xyz project". We have agreed this is not a strict requirement of inception, however those active in the Open Source community see this as criteria zero.

Also, do we have a good way of tracking technical concerns brought forward from the DD to the next phase? Have we considered creating and publishing a concrete timeline around each of these phases and what the plan is if projects don't meet these guidelines? I feel that many people are trying to provide good due diligence while also balancing their day jobs, so things are also getting possibly missed because the dates aren't well defined. (I know I've mentioned this to Chris so sorry to feel like a broken record here).

Would love to hear other's thoughts around this.

Thanks,

Erin
 

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 9:20 AM, alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Jess

That's really one for Dan but AIUI the whole website is in the process
of being nurtured into an optimal state for 2018 ....  So all comments
good & timely, anywhere.

a

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:16 PM, Jessica Frazelle <me@...> wrote:
> Quick question: what are the platinum members, the ones who paid the 300k?
>
> Do they need to be on the same slide / materials as the projects? Is
> that written into a contract or something? Also I'm more than happy to
> ask this on the call :)
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:14 AM, alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
>> thanks Dan & team
>>
>> @all TOC community, please do comment to Dan directly or on tomorrow's TOC call
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote:
>>> We'll be discussing maturity levels on the TOC call. This is just a quick
>>> note that at the TOC's request, we revised CNCF marketing materials to
>>> clearly separate Incubating and Inception projects:
>>>
>>> https://www.cncf.io/
>>> https://www.cncf.io/projects/
>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BoxFeENJcINgHbKfygXpXROchiRO2LBT-pzdaOFr4Zg/edit#slide=id.g2c13d20ecb_1_0
>>>
>>> We will obviously add a more prominent graduated section as soon as the
>>> first projects graduate. The same project separation will carry over to our
>>> marketing materials for KubeCon + CloudNativeCon.
>>> --
>>> Dan Kohn <dan@...>
>>> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io
>>> +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Jessie Frazelle
> 4096R / D4C4 DD60 0D66 F65A 8EFC  511E 18F3 685C 0022 BFF3
> pgp.mit.edu
>
>
>