My feeling is that the incubator incubates communities and their products. With the pTLP plan, the communities don't need incubating in the same way - they have sufficient maturity to self-manage. That is, to my mind, the essence of the proposal. In which case, it is the product that needs incubation, and thus an incubation annotation.
Now, I would argue that *any* project can bring in code to form a product that isn't ready yet, and that needs to follow the steps described for a pTLP. That is, it is a product that is market provisional, not the community or project. Could, for example, a normal TLP produce an incubated or provisional product? Upayavira On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 03:00 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: > On 3/4/15 1:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting <cutt...@apache.org > > <mailto:cutt...@apache.org>> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org > > <mailto:r...@apache.org>> wrote: > ... > > As a director, I still don't think the board needs to be involved in a > > pTLP's "graduation". As far as I'm concerned, any "provisional" > > status is self-imposed by the PMC and can be removed at its pleasure. > > From the board's perspective it's either an ASF project or it's not, > > there's not a useful middle ground. As a project it needs to provide > > reports, release according to accepted standards, operate openly, etc. > > It may be a young project, with a PMC dominated by old-timers who > > aren't responsible for much of the contribution, but I don't see why > > that requires a new formal status any more than we need a formal > > status for old, slow-moving projects that rarely release. > > > > Put directly, what does a pTLP's "graduation" change from the board's > > perspective? How should it change the way we review the project's > > reports, etc.? In short, why should we care about this label? If a > > PMC wishes to call itself "blue" that's fine too, but we don't need a > > resolution when it decides to call itself "purple". > > > > > > What's your view of 'incubation disclaimers'? The above paragraph makes > > most sense to me if there are none for pTLPs. > > The bigger question is: what does "pTLP" mean to the rest of the world? > > Incubation disclaimers are there to inform the rest of the world that > the community working there, and the software it produces, are not (yet) > true Apache projects. That is, we want end users to understand that > there may be different expectations of project behavior and software > product quality or availability for Incubator podlings than the world > has for full Apache projects. > > How are we clearly describing to end users what differences they might > expect between the operations and functionality of pTLPs versus Apache > projects (i.e. formal TLPs)? And who, specifically, decides when the > pTLP becomes a TLP? > > While it's important to ensure that we're being clear within our > communities about how we operate and improve, in this case it's also > really important that we make it clear to the rest of the world what a > pTLP is. > > - Shane > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
