2009/3/14 Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]> > Ross Gardler wrote: > >> [CC'd to labs to get comment from there too] >> > > crossposting, mmhh... so I reply to labs specific stuff here and SoC stuff > there... > > > 2009/3/14 Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]> >> >> Ross Gardler wrote: >>> >>> From the labs board report: >>>> --- Start quote --- >>>> >>>> == GSoC09 == >>>> >>>> The Vysper Lab is reaching out for GSoC09 students with one proposal >>>> [2]. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> >>>> >>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/labs-labs/200902.mbox/%[email protected]%3e >>>> [2] http://wiki.apache.org/general/SummerOfCode2009#vysper-project >>>> >>>> --- End Quote --- >>>> >>>> The goal of GSoC is to engage students with open source software >>>> development >>>> communities. >>>> >>>> The goal of Apache Labs is to "to provide the necessary resource to >>>> promote >>>> and maintain the innovative power within the Apache community without >>>> the >>>> burden of community building. " (https://labs.apache.org) >>>> >>>> I'm concerned that a lab is not the right place to introduce students to >>>> the >>>> way we do things over here, that is, labs explicitly do not do community >>>> development. If Vysper asked to be a part of GSoC outside of the ASF >>>> umbrella it would not (IMHO) be accepted. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Labs is as much about community as every other project here at Apache. >>> Maybe this does not manifest yet, if you look at how lablings work today, >>> but that's how it's bound to be. >>> >> >> >> [Note that I start negative and end positive, so don't reply whilst >> reading, >> you may be wasting your time ;-)] >> >> I don't agree. Labs was specifically created so that people don't need to >> worry about building community and managing the project in the formal way >> that ASF projects are managed. As I quote above, the second sentence of >> the >> labs home page includes the words "without the burden of community >> building". >> > > But you shouldn't read this as: "Community is building is wrong at labs." > Quite the contrary! If it wasn't a collaborative project, it wouldn't be an > Apache project and labs wouldn't be able to enter the Incubator.
+1, community building is not *required* to be in labs, but it is required in the Incubator. It is for this reason that, later in my mail, I acknowledge that some labs projects may be able to offer community engagement experience. However, we cannot assume that a lab wants to create a community. So a blanket acceptance of labs into GSoC is probably not a good thing for GSoC. ... I think you are overemphasizing the community-aversion of Labs. > Its just not a precondition to enter like at Incubator. > I didn't intend to say labs are automatically community averse, see above. I'm sorry if that was the impression my mail gave. > > > I copied this mail to labs. But the decision about how to handle this will >> be made on code-awards, not labs. If people want to track the progress of >> a >> lab application they need to join code awards. >> > > Sure, just as with any other application, I'd guess? Yes. Ross -- Ross Gardler OSS Watch - supporting open source in education and research http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk
