View Source

Purpose

This guide helps podlings apply ASF governance principles as they progress along the Incubation path. It explains what governance looks like on a day-to-day basis and at key milestones.

Note: This path assumes a “typical” podling. Not all projects are the same, and timelines or practices may vary for legitimate reasons.

Core Principles in Practice

Community over Code — Decisions are made in the open, with consensus, not dictated by a single company or contributor.
Meritocracy — Recognize contributors by granting them more responsibility over time.
Transparency — Use the mailing lists for decision-making. Avoid private or closed-door decisions.
Independence — Ensure the project can stand on its own, not reliant on one vendor, employer, or sponsor.

Early Stage (0–3 months)

Establish the dev@ list as the primary governance forum.
PPMC formation: Mentors and initial committers form the Podling Project Management Committee (PPMC).
Decision making: Use the dev@ list for discussions and practice lazy consensus. Reserve formal [VOTE] threads for binding decisions (e.g., adding committers/PPMC members, graduation).
Mentor guidance: Mentors model transparent behavior (moving private discussions to dev@, reminding about process).

Growth Stage (3–12 months)

Committer growth: Add new committers based on merit and community trust. Run committer votes on the list.
PPMC expansion: Add active committers who demonstrate project stewardship.
Community diversity: Actively grow contributors from more than one company to avoid single-vendor dominance.
Release practice: Aim to produce the first ASF release by around 6 months, following ASF policy and requiring a community vote.
Reporting: Submit timely podling reports. Use reporting as an opportunity for the PPMC to reflect on progress, community health, and challenges - not just a checkbox for mentors. Reports are reviewed by the IPMC and are a key tool for oversight. They help podlings demonstrate progress, flag risks early, and get support from the wider Incubator community.
Governance habits: Document project decisions in the wiki or dev@ archives; use lazy consensus where appropriate.

Maturing Stage (12+ months)

Independence: Ensure that no single company dominates the PPMC or its committers.
Self-governance: PPMC members assume oversight, not just mentorship. They start initiating reports, votes, and proposals without prompting.
Mentor step-back: At this stage, mentors should act mainly as advisors. The PPMC should lead discussions, community growth, votes, and reporting.
Graduation readiness: Demonstrate:
- Sustainable, diverse community
- Regular ASF releases
- Mailing list as the decision centre
- PPMC actively governing, mentors guiding lightly

Common Governance Pitfalls

Private channels: Making binding decisions on Slack, WeChat, or company email.
Single vendor control: Committers or PPMC stacked from one employer.
Rubber-stamping mentors: Relying on mentors for all votes and decisions.
Opaque releases: Failing to involve the community or document release votes.

Checklist at Each Milestone

These checkpoints reflect a typical podling journey. Timelines and milestones may vary for legitimate reasons, and that’s acceptable as long as progress toward ASF governance is visible.

3 months: Is discussion happening on dev@? Has the PPMC formed?
6 months: Has the podling produced its first ASF release? Have we added a new committer and run a committer vote?
12 months: Have we expanded the PPMC? Are we practicing self-governance with minimal mentor prompting?
Before graduation: Are we self-governing, diverse, transparent, and ASF-compliant? Has the community prepared a graduation resolution and built consensus around it?

Reflection Questions

Are decisions visible on the mailing list?
Does the PPMC lead governance or just follow mentors?
Are contributors recognized promptly through committership?
Could the project survive if the original sponsor company stepped back?