Consider eliminating release reviews (except for specification projects)
Progress reviews can replace release reviews per the EDP. Unfortunately this doesn't apply to specification projects per the EFSP, so specification projects will have to continue to do release reviews.
We may be able to solve several problems at once:
- New projects can flounder a bit. If we schedule a progress review for three months after they've been provisioned, we can help make sure that they are progressing.
- There are a number misunderstandings that we can avoid (e.g., IP Logs and corresponding reviews are intended to capture the general state of intellectual property tracking by the project team, not capture the state of any single release).
- Many PMCs are not actively engaged with their projects; perhaps the EMO bringing them review findings can help facilitate greater involvement
- Give the Eclipse Architecture Council more insight into what's happening in the project space; give them a review role in the process.
- Our current process of waiting for project teams to engage the EMO leaves the project space littered with dead projects.
- Apparently release reviews are (paraphrasing) "a PITA".
Consider having EMO initiate annual progress reviews
- Give projects a one-month warning
- EMO validates IP Log, legal documentation
- PMC validates conformance to EDP, open source rules of engagement
- Architecture Council reviews results during monthly meeting
- Take the responsibility away from projects; one fewer thing to think about
- Spread the load
- Identify and terminate dead projects
- Identify and connect with projects that aren't engaged in the process
- ~400 projects