Hi Dave, On 2/27/13 9:44 AM, "Dave Fisher" <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>[..snip..] Thanks for the examples. >Each case differs. I can agree that we do not want to encourage new >podlings to come in with Plan A to be graduating into an existing TLP, >but I don't think we should exclude a future case should it be strong >enough to convince the IPMC. TL;DR here -- your point above is the one that I am trying to make/echo/make strong (minus the excluding part for me which I'll get to in a sec). Point: "we do not want to encourage new podlings to come in with Plan A to be graduating into an existing TLP" That's my entire point, and I think Greg's +1, and Bertrand's +1, etc. Anyone can moan and groan to go even further than that. I've been around the Foundation long enough to know that may take time/effort, etc. YMMV. That said, if another future situation comes up I don't think at least in my current POV that I would be convinced that that's ever good and that's based on my experience first hand being in many situations recently that involved this (Lucene, Hadoop, Nutch, Tika, etc.) The rest of the scenarios are dealt with at a time that there is an actual concrete example by the parties involved that need to be. Until then, we are making conjecture. The outcome I'd like to see is to echo and promote what I've labeled Point: above. Seems I'm not alone. We'll see what happens and you're welcome to your opinion, as I am to mine. Cheers, Chris > > >> That's the whole point of the "sponsoring PMC" portion of the Incubator >> proposal, from the beginning, to declare >> the intent to graduate into a existing TLP - otherwise that section >> wouldn't be needed and the answer would always >> be Incubator PMC. For the record, since the whole umbrella project >>thing, >> most of the sponsoring (I can name perhaps 1-5) >> incoming Incubator podlings are all Incubator PMC sponsored, for intent >>to >> graduate to TLP. >> >> On the graduating into existing TLP end, I don't think that makes sense >>- >> apparently at least 2 other people don't either judging by +1s and >>words. >> I would like to fix that. But, I don't think I've ever seen #1 where >>they >> haven't already declared that their intent from the beginning. >> >>> >>> (2) Receiving PMC votes to accept IP - if not cleared then it accepts >>> that responsibility. >> >> If PMCs can accept the type of "podling sized" IP contribution then I >> think that the Incubator is a pointless committee. >> >> Cheers, >> Chris >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
