I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of "substantial".
Thanks.
Mike Drob wrote:
The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly
non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered "substantial"
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sean Busbey wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the
spirit
of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover.
Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more
like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else.
It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it
takes to
require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines
are concerned.
From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
"""
From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is
not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial
contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system
and on our public mailing lists.
"""
Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see
these examples as "substantial". I haven't found guidelines yet that better
clarify the definition of "substantial".
