On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:57 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a
project in without approval of the incubator PMC? Just look at
the raft of projects being brought in via Geronimo and the WS
PMC. There's not a thing I can do, regardless of the merits.
The only thing I can say is whether or not their community is good
enough to merit graduation.
Right, and that's the only thing you are qualified to do. You don't
have the right to tell other people what they can or cannot do at
the ASF. You don't have the right to say that one project is more
deserving of our resources than some other project. What you do have
is the right to be involved, to help their incubation (or not), and
to vote against their graduation if you so desire.
I understand how the rules currently work. I don't agree that they
are working well for us.
I think that the incubation process is setting an incredibly
low bar for access to the Apache brand name
Methinks you have forgotten that there was no bar before incubator
existed -- the code was just copied to cvs.
No, I remember, and I wouldn't choose to go back to those days.
And we require disclaimers and clear notice that projects ARE in the
Incubator. Look at how the folks are complaining that we are
trying to make
the projects look different by being in the Incubator. They ARE
different.
And they MUST be Incubator branded, and follow Incubation rules.
Most people in the world are unaware of the difference between an
incubated project and an Apache project. Roy has also stated that
once a project is in the incubator it ought to be regarded as an
Apache project.
That's because an Apache project is an EFFORT of the ASF. It is not
some diploma that people receive at the end of graduation. Everything
done at the ASF is an Apache project. Some are organized better than
others, and some are allowed to make their own release decisions, but
all of them are collaborative projects using ASF infrastructure and
following the literal meaning of Contributor as defined in our
license.
And, when needed, the board can terminate a project whether it is in
the incubator or not.
To us an Apache project is an effort of the ASF. To the majority of
people out there, being an Apache project (rightly or wrongly) is
branding stamp. You might not like it, but that's how many people
treat it. And that's why one of the first things a company wants do
when it proposes incubation is issue a press release.
If people believe that the Incubator should not accept any new
projects,
then they should convince the board to make it so. The incubator is
the place where people wanting to work on new projects can do so
within a neutral environment with limited risk to the foundation.
If you think that such things should be done at SourceForge instead,
and that the ASF should only accept fully-formed communities after
they have a questionable track-record of IP contributions, then go
ahead and ask the board to shut down the incubator.
Right now, however, all I hear is belly-aching by people who have not
been doing any of the Incubator's work, nor that of infrastructure,
so have little basis to complain about anything.
I was the mentor and co-sponsor for XMLBeans, which graduated from
the incubator, after being there for about a year. As member of
the incubator PMC, I feel that it is part of my responsibility to ask
whether what we have is working for the foundation or not.
Ted
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
