On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:23 AM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 9:38 AM Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > This is very much not thought through to the end. One question raised for > > example is whether projects would even want to become a TLP. > > The mission states: "We do this by providing services and support for > many > > like-minded software project communities consisting of individuals who > > choose to participate in ASF activities." > > I don't see anything in there requiring anyone to "join" (I remember the > > recent discussions about that). If you sign up to Github you're not all > of > > a sudden a "Github project" but still benefit from its services. > > > > We could do something similar. > > Do I understand correctly that you're proposing a sort of "indefinite > incubation" for projects which want to benefit from our infra but don't > want to follow one or more of the principles we have deemed important to > producing open source software? > We have forcibly retired projects before. That option would still be available in this model. The community "should" be moving towards Apache-style governance and TLP-style releases. Lack of movement would be an indicator to consider retirement. Just like we've always done. > I don't want to do that. If your project is in the incubator, it should be > with at least the intention of finding out if the ASF is a good fit for > your community. That answer could be "no". And it could take a long time > to figure that out. That's OK. But our volunteer time is a limited > resource. We don't need to spend it on projects which don't actually want > to be part of the ASF. > I don't see Lars suggesting allowing such projects. There would still be a Proposal, and retirement is still an option. Cheers, -g
