+1 for 1. Regards, Eric
On 6/24/10 12:21 PM, "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@apache.org> wrote: > On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) >> >> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a >> strawman ;-) > > Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this > vote to a conclusion :) > > Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead > and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this > time. > > If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with > guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource > naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring > all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify > this decision. > > At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in > terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the > group to vote for an initial chair/VP. If they are unsure of their group > yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair > for the first six months, if they rather would do that? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
