>> Maybe there are 3 committers to make a release, but after the release >> the project is more or less mature because the codebase is very small. >> Does this really justify to go TLP, just to make a release, make a >> full-blown website, etc.? I don't think so.
> What is it that RAT, or these other projects need, that Labs doesn't > give you? releases? mailing lists? websites? If a project *really* > needs those things, then it's big enough for a TLP. If not, then can't > it just stay in Labs? >From an users point of view: Labs is a project were apache people just try out things. I don't expect the code to be working correct at all. I look at labs if I want to check about what are people thinking of. Sometimes I look into the code to see how things work. But I never would include labs source into my own project out of the box. If RAT would be in labs, I would think its not stable, just a proof of concept. If RAT would have a release at gems.apache.org or somewhere else, I would think that this is a serious project. That my bugs get heard (hopefully). That somebody on the mailinglist will answer, even if its a small component. It would feel like "commons.apache.org". I don't think the labs are a place were a stable codebase can draw much attention from users. Cheers, Christian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
