Maturity model
The following table summarizes project’s self-assessment against the Apache Maturity Model.
| ID | Description | Status |
|---|---|---|
Code | ||
CD10 | The project produces Open Source software, for distribution to the public at no charge. [1] | YES. The project source code is licensed under the Apache License, version 2.0. |
CD20 | The project's code is easily discoverable and publicly accessible. | YES. Linked from the website, available via git.apache.org and GitHub. |
CD30 | The code can be built in a reproducible way using widely available standard tools. | YES. The project uses Apache Maven. The build processes are described on the website. |
CD40 | The full history of the project's code is available via a source code control system, in a way that allows any released version to be recreated. | YES. The project uses a git repository and releases are tagged. |
CD50 | The provenance of each line of code is established via the source code control system, in a reliable way based on strong authentication of the committer. When third-party contributions are committed, commit messages provide reliable information about the code provenance. [2] | YES. The project uses a git repository, managed by Apache Infra, ensuring provenance of each line of code to a committer. SB: We need a page on the website encouraging and explaining third party contributions. |
Licenses and Copyright | ||
LC10 | The code is released under the Apache License, version 2.0. | YES. Source distributions clearly state license. |
LC20 | Libraries that are mandatory dependencies of the project's code do not create more restrictions than the Apache License does. [3], [4] | YES. The website contains a dependency report for each module. streams-project and streams-example root poms for example. SB: We probably need a dependency audit artifact of some kind. |
LC30 | The libraries mentioned in LC20 are available as Open Source software. | YES. All mandatory dependencies are available as open source software. |
LC40 | Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement (the "Apache iCLA") that defines which code they are allowed to commit and how they need to identify code that is not their own. | YES. The project uses a repository managed by Apache Infra -- write access requires an Apache account, which requires an ICLA on file. |
LC50 | The copyright ownership of everything that the project produces is clearly defined and documented. [5] | YES. All files in the source repository have appropriate headers. Even further, Software Grant Agreements for the initial donations and Corporate CLAs have been filed. |
Releases | ||
RE10 | Releases consist of source code, distributed using standard and open archive formats that are expected to stay readable in the long term. [6] | YES. Source releases are distributed via dist.apache.org and linked from the website. |
RE20 | Releases are approved by the project's PMC (see CS10), in order to make them an act of the Foundation. | YES. All incubating releases have been unanimously approved by the Streams community and the Incubator, all with at least 3 (P)PMC votes. |
RE30 | Releases are signed and/or distributed along with digests that can be reliably used to validate the downloaded archives. | YES. All releases are signed, and the KEYS file is provided on dist.apache.org and as part of streams project. |
RE40 | Convenience binaries can be distributed alongside source code but they are not Apache Releases -- they are just a convenience provided with no guarantee. | YES. Convenience binaries are distributed via Maven Central Repository only. They are not distributed via dist.apache.org. |
RE50 | The release process is documented and repeatable to the extent that someone new to the project is able to independently generate the complete set of artifacts required for a release. | YES. A very detailed release guide and release setup instructions are available on the website. A release script is also provided to assist new release managers with the process.
|
Quality | ||
QU10 | The project is open and honest about the quality of its code. Various levels of quality and maturity for various modules are natural and acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated. | YES. The project records all bugs in the Apache’s JIRA issue tracker. SB: A discussion about how comprehensive JIRA is with regard to improvements the community believe to be necessary leading up to 1.0 is probably warranted. |
QU20 | The project puts a very high priority on producing secure software. [7] | YES. Security issues are treated with the highest priority. AD: How / where is this documented/explained? AFAIK it is not, yet. |
QU30 | The project provides a well-documented channel to report security issues, along with a documented way of responding to them. [8] | SB: We should put a link to ASF security information on the website. AD: Many projects do have a dedicated page or section explaining how security issues are handled. |
QU40 | The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and aims to document any incompatible changes and provide tools and documentation to help users transition to new features. | AD: Can we say anything about this, for example referring to SB: Agree, we should add a compatibility page which diocuments how breaking changes in various modules should be handled from a release perspective. |
QU50 | The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in a timely manner. | YES. All JIRA issues are addressed in a timely manner. |
Community | ||
CO10 | The project has a well-known homepage that points to all the information required to operate according to this maturity model. | SB: We should mention the maturity model (and link to this page?) from the website. SB: We should do one more pass prior to graduation to see what else would be helpful to add. SB: Created Apache Streams Website TODOs to track small(ish) improvements. |
CO20 | The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in good faith and in a respectful manner and adds value to the project. | YES. SB: we should create a detailed contribution guide to help on-board new contributors.. AD: Contribution guide indeed would be good, IMO needed, to be added. |
CO30 | Contributions include not only source code, but also documentation, constructive bug reports, constructive discussions, marketing and generally anything that adds value to the project. | YES. SB: we should work to enumerate more of the non-development opportunities to contribute in JIRA. AD: A simple/effective example, or starting point: http://airavata.apache.org/get-involved.html |
CO40 | The community is meritocratic and over time aims to give more rights and responsibilities to contributors who add value to the project. | YES. The community has elected >5 new committers during incubation. |
CO50 | The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as commit access or decision power is clearly documented and is the same for all contributors. | SB: We should describe basic contributor / committer responsibilities and expected level of contribution to become a committer in the new contribution guide. AD: A simple/effective example, or starting point: http://airavata.apache.org/get-involved.html |
CO60 | The community operates based on consensus of its members (see CS10) who have decision power. Dictators, benevolent or not, are not welcome in Apache projects. | YES. The project works to build consensus on major decisions on the mailing list. |
CO70 | The project strives to answer user questions in a timely manner. | YES. SB: It's probably time to create a user mailing list. SM: An infra request has been filed to create a user mail list on Feb 13, 2017 SB: Suneel Marthi looks like INFRA-13503 was closed won't fix SM: there's already a mailing list that was created - user@streams.incubator.apache.org |
Consensus Building | ||
CS10 | The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have decision power -- the project's PMC (Project Management Committee) consists of those contributors. | YES. The website contains the list of committers and PPMC members. |
CS20 | Decisions are made by consensus among PMC members [9] and are documented on the project's main communications channel. Community opinions are taken into account but the PMC has the final word if needed. | YES. The project has been making important decisions on the project mailing lists. |
CS30 | Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when discussion is not sufficient. [10] | YES. The project uses the standard ASF voting rules. Voting rules are clearly stated before the voting starts for each individual vote. |
CS40 | In Apache projects, vetoes are only valid for code commits and are justified by a technical explanation, as per the Apache voting rules defined in CS30. | YES. The project hasn’t used a veto at any point and relies on robust code reviews. |
CS50 | All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written form on the project's main communications channel. Offline, face-to-face or private discussions [11] that affect the project are also documented on that channel. | YES. The project has been making important decisions on the project mailing lists. Minor decisions may occasionally happen during code reviews, which are also asynchronous and in written form. |
Independence | ||
IN10 | The project is independent from any corporate or organizational influence. [12] | YES. Apache Streams (P)PMC includes employees of AveroBuzz, Facebook, Google, Hippo, Hortonworks, IBM, People Pattern, Red Hat, Umbel, and more. No company or organization has signficantly more influence than any other. |
IN20 | Contributors act as themselves as opposed to representatives of a corporation or organization. | YES. |