Turning ASF Principles into Everyday Project Practice
This guide helps podlings apply ASF governance principles as they progress along the Incubation path.
Explains what governance looks like day-to-day
Describes governance at key milestones
Assumes a “typical” podling, variations are normal
Community over Code - Decisions made through open consensus.
Trust through Contribution - Responsibility grows with demonstrated participation and collaboration.
Transparency - All decisions visible on public mailing lists.
Independence - Projects can thrive beyond any one employer.
Consensus - Discuss until broad agreement is reached
Lazy consensus - Silence implies consent for routine actions
[VOTE] threads - Used for binding decisions (e.g., new committers, releases)
At least three +1s required for release approval
Handle disagreements through discussion, not majority rule
Establish dev@
as the public decision center
Form the PPMC with mentors and initial committers
Practice lazy consensus and transparent communication
Mentors model ASF process and redirect private discussions to the list
Add new committers based on merit and trust
Expand the PPMC with active, responsible contributors
Encourage multi-company diversity
Produce the first ASF release (~6 months target)
Submit timely podling reports
Record key decisions publicly (wiki or list archive)
Reports reviewed by the IPMC for oversight
Demonstrate transparency and community health
Use reports to:
Reflect on progress and blockers
Ask for help or mentor input
Record public accountability
PPMC leads governance and oversight independently
Mentors step back into advisory roles
Diversity: no single company dominates committers or PPMC
Sustainable governance means continuity through turnover
Demonstrate:
Sustainable, balanced community
Regular ASF-compliant releases
Mailing list as the decision hub
Private decision-making (Slack, WeChat, or company email)
Over-reliance on one vendor or employer
Mentors making or approving all key decisions
Failing to resolve disagreements through discussion
Releases without community involvement or recorded votes
3 months: dev@ active? PPMC formed?
6 months: First release? New committer added?
12 months: Expanded PPMC? Self-governance evident?
Before graduation:
Diverse, independent, transparent community
Regular ASF releases
Consensus on graduation resolution
Are all major decisions visible on the mailing list?
Does the PPMC lead governance or rely on mentors?
Are contributors recognized promptly through committership?
Could the project continue if the sponsor company stepped back?
ASF governance matures through practice.
Mentors guide, PPMC leads.
Transparency and inclusiveness are essential.
Healthy podlings govern themselves, the Apache Way.
Graduation isn’t a checklist. It’s recognition that the community already operates as an ASF project.