>> > All right, > > I get it now. Thank you Martin. Yes, It sounds now more reasonable to move > in the incubator.
Sorry you didn't get it :) (probably me though, mailing too much today). I was saying that I think Cactus can gather enough votes in the current situation for eg a release (so without a need to go through the incubator), so the Incubator path isn't needed (at least the way I look at it). Exception of course is the legal part :), besides that we are taling about an existing Jakarta codebase here. If people think the cactus should go back to the incubator, because of a lack of vibrant community and not being able to release, because of the 3 +1's, we probably shouldn't stop there , and start shipping other Jakarta (sub and subsub) projects to the incubator. In this case Felipe was keeping tabs on what you were doing (and if I understood correctly Felipe currently hasn't much time left to work on Cactus, but is still interested) and Kenney Westerhof also worked on a cactus plugin for maven2, so he could also be a candidate to become active on cactus.. So the path will probable be (got no objections on this when sending this to private) - Get your paperwork done (Code grant, icla, ccla) - Have a vote on cactus-dev / general to accept your codebase into Cactus - Do the incubator paperwork, start a vote there (based on lazy consensus, so if no one objects, the code is accepted) - Start a vote (on cactus-dev / general) to add you as a Jakarta committer. No difference in this scenario with Mantissa/Luc path (to give an example) Mvgr, Martin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
