On 8/4/06, J Aaron Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/3/06, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 05:54:14PM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but I have to vote -1 (binding).
> >
> I very much agree with Garretts concerns - and would be much in favor of
> not bringing the project into incubation before they have proven an
> actual community and that they can work the standard the "apache way".
> I feel it would look very much as an ASF endorsement of a standard that
> we may not have any influence on at all - maybe things will look
> different in a few months time, but right now I'm far from convinced.
I understand that there are some specific circumstances in this case,
but in general I believe this sort of criteria is why we get
complaints that it's impossible to "innovate" at Apache any more. We
require all the grunt work of innovation to occur outside of Apache.
The issues of an open specification is one thing. But aren't "proven
an actual community" and "work the standard 'apache way'" graduation
requirements, not entry requirements? If we expect something coming
into the incubator to already have a fully functioning, health
Apache-style community, then the only point of the Incubator is for
handling licensing issues.
For what it's worth, I don't have any intrinsic problem with a group
bringing some code to the ASF in an attempt to start a community
around it, as long as that's what's actually happening. The general
feeling I got from reading the mail around this proposal wasn't
leaning in that direction, now that could just be a missunderstanding
on my part, but it is part of what convinced me to vote -1.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
