On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote: > On 02/06/2012 01:41 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 01:26:47PM -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >>> >>> It might be worthwhile to require 3 ASF members on the initial release, >>> 2 on the next, 1 on the following and then trust the committee to follow >>> the established precedent. >> >> >> +1 >> >> Instead of automatically decreasing the count, the device I'd suggest is >> for >> the ASF Members on the committee to vote to grant binding votes to >> individual >> contributors who they believe have demonstrated a thorough understanding >> of >> the Apache Way. >> >> Release Managers would be prime candidates; given the challenge of getting >> an >> incubating release out the door, an RM will likely have acquired greater >> expertise than many ASF PMC members who have been voted directly into TLP >> PMCs. Just being an RM might not be enough, but it would be left to the >> judgment of the ASF Members / Mentors to vet and vote on candidates. >> >> The canonical path towards project autonomy would thus be to make three >> incubating releases with three different contributors serving as RM. > >
Agreed that we need to have supervision on the initial phase, and that some type of gradual phasing is required before they can handle the releases by themselves. > What worries me a lot about the recent proposals, not only the text above, > is that project autonomy seems to be measured foremost by just doing proper > releases. > > To me, Apache == Community over code. > > Code is important, it is what we are all here for (too), but the 'Apache > Way' and especially community development and a healthy diversity IMO are > even more critical. And especially for reaching project autonomy: *that* IMO > is what the Incubator is (or should be) about. > Code and Releases are things that the Foundation might have legal liability, that's why I have some concerns about leaving it without any supervision. I also agreed with your point about community, and I think this is the place where ComDev would get pluged in. > Learning the 'tricks' and reasons of doing proper releases isn't easy, and > for sure required. But a 'perfect' RM doesn't automatically make a 'perfect' > Apache TLP PMC member in my book. Which has been discussed quite a lot as > well last week. > > The thing I'm worried about with the 'radical/revolutionary proposals of > creating Incubator projects as TLPs from the start, is that they they also > start 'on their own', even with 3 Mentors on board. > Meaning: there is no 'glue' or common community between individual > 'incubator' TLPs anymore which can help them, with the help of (many more) > experienced IPMC members, as well as fellow Incubator PPMC members, to learn > the ropes. > Beyond merely doing proper releases. > > I fully agree the current Incubator has its issues, but radically killing it > off IMO will also kill off more than just those issues: it will also kill > the Incubator community itself. Maybe ComDev can or actually then will have > to take over, but we should be really careful before breaking something down > without having a replacement 'safety net' in place. > > Ate > > Yes, moving from one "Incubator" to "ComDev" will not really fix all the issues... but it seems that consensus is being built on this direction. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
