RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: > If Incubator Committee takes "graduation examination" bi-monthly > in place by force partly, many "under-incubation" projects might > pass the exams. Even though fails, they would pass in the next period. Each project in the Incubator is required to maintain a STATUS file, which contains information related to its readiness to "graduate" from the Incubator. We have plans to do a periodic review of each project's status prepatory to the Incubator's own report to the ASF Board. > Most of the "under-incubation" projects do not have "definitive goals". All of the projects in the Incubator have definitive goals, as noted by the STATUS file. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: ... Most of the "under-incubation" projects do not have "definitive goals". http://incubator.apache.org/projects/index.html Every project name links to the goals. ...(moved text from top to bottom) > Very simple. If Incubator Committee takes "graduation examination" > bi-monthly in place by force partly, many "under-incubation" projects > might pass the exams. Even though fails, they would pass in the > next period. We have already decided that Projects should send in status updates, which seems in line with your suggestion. I will soon ask projects to send a status update, so we will see soon if you are right (I hope so :-) -- Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:55:27 -0500 Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > In my opinion, some projects are spending too long in the Incubator because > > they aren't focusing on getting out. > Let us analyze why that is. Very simple. If Incubator Committee takes "graduation examination" bi-monthly in place by force partly, many "under-incubation" projects might pass the exams. Even though fails, they would pass in the next period. Psycologically, this would be proven without difficulty. Most of the "under-incubation" projects do not have "definitive goals". You can remember old high school days. "Exam" period makes people down in the dump but very important in life. Makes the green youths matured dramatically. Legally speaking, "legislation of specified duration" "an act valid for a specified period of time" ... would be different in terms of their blueprints and side-effects (psycological effects etc.) from normal acts. Especially, in criminal laws. Now I am talking about the effects of "specified duration" with an economist in japan who had been one of the members in IETF/W3C. I found a crucial difference between the asf and w3c. In Derivatives/Securitization (advanced finance) field, "DURATION" is a very important term, needless to say. I am sure that the concept of "duration" would be tightly related to institutionalization in any forms of the organizations. Sincerely, - Tetsuya Kitahata -- Terra-International, Inc. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.terra-intl.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > In my opinion, some projects are spending too long in the > > Incubator because they aren't focusing on getting out. > Let us analyze why that is. I cannot speak for why they don't focusing on exiting, Andrew, and neither can you. You might ask each project why they have cleared whatever issues they need to clear. Each project is different: some have IP issues, some have community issues, some may just be comfortable and haven't bothered to finish doing their paperwork. This is something that the Incubator PMC will likely take up this quarter after we have finished our own re-documentation of Incubator processes to reflect recent changes. > > Endorsement by the ASF > Great, I have a few more questions: I'm sure you do. > Do you think that to an Apache layman there is a great difference > between a project legally protected and served from Apache servers > and a "not in incubator" project with the same distinctions? Incubation status is more of a caution to a user, or a redistributor, that the project's IP is still being cleared up, or that its community may not be stable enough to ensure the long term viability of the project within the ASF. And yes, I think that people do make a distinction when something is stamped with the "Incubator brand." Although we are not requiring projects created earlier to change their URLs, new projects have their web sites under the incubator.apache.org domain. > What effects does "pre-acceptance" have on the motivation to build a proper > community? Projects in the Incubator are not assured of acceptance. What I have observed is that if a proposed project has a diverse developer base containing existing ASF Committers and going into an existing PMC then it is likely to be able to check off the Community issues, and thus be prepared to exit quickly. As for any motivation to build a proper community, even existing ASF projects should be continually invested in building their community. > How does serving projects that we are not certain are clean legally, etc. > from Apache servers and requiring CLAs from their committers and offering > them some form of protection put the foundation at risk? What benefits do > we receive from accepting this risk? As I said the last time a related question came up, only the Board can and should speak authoritatively on the subject of legal protections. So I'm not going to engage in a hypothetical debate about the legal protection afforded to projects in the Incubator. The benefit we gain from incubation is growing the ASF while reducing risk related to tainted code and unstable communities. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
> In my opinion, some projects are spending too long in the Incubator because > they aren't focusing on getting out. Let us analyze why that is. > Endorsement by the ASF Great, I have a few more questions: Do you think that to an Apache layman (the larger technical and potentially world community) there is a great difference between a project legally protected and served from Apache servers and a "not in incubator" project with the same distinctions? Do you think there is a legal distinction? For those seeking the Apache brand, do you think there is a great deal of reason to propel further? What effects does "pre-acceptance" have on the motivation to build a proper community? How does serving projects that we are not certain are clean legally, etc. from Apache servers and requiring CLAs from their committers and offering them some form of protection put the foundation at risk? What benefits do we receive from accepting this risk? Thanks, -Andy -- Andrew C. Oliver http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI http://jakarta.apache.org/poi For Java and Excel, Got POI? The views expressed in this email are those of the author and are almost definitely not shared by the Apache Software Foundation, its board or its general membership. In fact they probably most definitively disagree with everything espoused in the above email. > From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: community@apache.org > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:05:34 -0500 > To: > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs > > Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > >>> Unrelated to whether or not we would use it, I think that blojsom could > be a >>> very nice ASF project. From what I have seen of it, I'd support its > entry >>> to the Incubator. > >> Does it seem sensible to take an already successful ASL licensed, >> community developed piece of software by an already successful >> open source developer and force it into a somewhat beta status by >> making it go through the incubator "just because that is the way >> things are done"? > > The Incubator's purpose is to ensure that projects coming into the ASF > > - are legally clean, > - that their communities are healthy, > - and that they follow basic ASF policies/procedures. > > In my opinion, some projects are spending too long in the Incubator because > they aren't focusing on getting out. > > If a project is a successful, ASF license, community-developed piece of > software, then it need not stay long in the Incubator. However, ASF > projects are supposed to be developed by communities, because it is > important that the project survive beyond the interests of any particular > participant. That is why two of the purposes for Incubation are to ensure > that there is a healthy developing COMMUNITY, and that it is following basic > ASF policies. > > Cocoon's Lenya project and XML's XMLBeans project are far from "beta > status." As noted by multiple projects in the Incubator: "Incubation is > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects. While > incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the completeness or > stability of the code, it does indicate that the project has yet to be fully > endorsed by the ASF." > > Endorsement by the ASF is based upon with the belief that a project's IP is > clean, and that it has developed a healthy community that will ensure its > long term viability. We incubate projects to ensure those things, not for > ceremony or "just because that is the way things are done." > > --- Noel > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Ted Leung wrote: > If we had some kind of record (like a FOAF file) that we stick krell, > and planet* and whatever data in, that would be good. We're starting > to have data all over the place. members.txt, urls.txt, and probably > more that I'm not remembering. Be nice to have an authoritative file > that can generate all the rest (in their existing formats so as not > to break working code). Sander and I have been mulling over using LDAP for this purpose. It supports all of the kinds of data we need, is integrated with all sorts of authentication mechanisms, and is supported by many languages. From that we could have tools to emit the existing files, and people could start to migrate their tools to work directly off of the LDAP database. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Another meaning of Apache
Eureka! http://www.apache.org/~tetsuya/peach.gif (A Peach Tree -> Apache Tree) In our country, there is a nice proverb (originally, from china). http://www.apache.org/~tetsuya/seikei.gif This means: "The tree of peach would never say anything, but the passengers would create nice *path* under the tree spontaneously step by step for those who follow." ... very nice. <^_^> ... Philosophy of Life. I love A Peach and Apache. (Philapache?) - Tetsuya Kitahata -- Terra-International, Inc. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.terra-intl.com/ http://www.apache.org/~tetsuya/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
On Jan 11, 2004, at 3:16 AM, Ted Leung wrote: I've created a directory 'planet' in the committers CVS. It just contains the planet config file at the moment. In preparation for Tom's hosting coming on line, committers can add their entries by following my example. Done. For those who want to set up categorized RSS feeds using MovableType, have a look at http://www.hutteman.com/weblog/2003/03/07-49.html Ideally this wants to generated from some centralized record, but I'm willing to refactor the process as we go. I'll make a real announcement to committers@ once we get the hosting squared away. Let me know if I can help. -- Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source Java & XMLAn Orixo Member Read my weblog athttp://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/ stevenn at outerthought.orgstevenn at apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
I've created a directory 'planet' in the committers CVS. It just contains the planet config file at the moment. In preparation for Tom's hosting coming on line, committers can add their entries by following my example. Ideally this wants to generated from some centralized record, but I'm willing to refactor the process as we go. I'll make a real announcement to committers@ once we get the hosting squared away. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Dave Brondsema wrote: > So if it's not a formality that all new ASF projects should undergo, who decides > if a project should be incubated or if it can go directly to being a regular > project? The ASF Board, when it created the Incubator, and designated it as the only PMC authorized to accept new code bases on behalf of the Foundation. No project is allowed to accept externally developed code bases except through the Incubator. That is not to say that there have not been violations of this rule, including recently, but that is the rule. Some of the violations did not come with code grants. Having a substantial code base funded and developed by a corporation, and then contributed to the ASF is great, but not without a signed authorization that we have the right to distribute it under the Apache Software License. Filling out a STATUS form helps to make sure that foul ups like that don't continue to happen. How hard is it to fill this form out for a permanent record: http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/incubator/site/projects/incubat ion-status-template.cwiki? And not everything needs to be filled out, depending upon where the code base is going to land. The Incubator does not exist to be onerous or torturous. Projects need to stay in the Incubator only long enough to satisfy the criteria. The Incubator's job is to make sure that the IP is clean, the community healthy, and the basic rules are followed. Recent changes to the Incubation process direct involve each project closely in the process, which is a significant change. In several recent cases, projects have spent more time arguing about why they should be exempt or given special considerations than they have had to spend on Incubation. In a simple case of an externally developed code base being contributed to an existing project, the code base entered the Incubator last week, and looks likely to exit it next week. The time was spent primarily to receive documentation of the contribution, remove discovered GPL dependencies, verifying that there were no other IP issues, and completing a STATUS form. Consider Axion as an example of a standalone package. It was accepted into the Incubator on December 19th. From their STATUS (http://incubator.apache.org/projects/axion.html), I would expect that they are close to being ready to leave, and probably could have by now except for the holidays. They need to finishing filling in their STATUS, but although we won't know until they finish, from what I believe true of their actual project status, they ought to be good to exit. Mind you, although Axion was developed externally, it was done by ASF Committers, and is going into an existing PMC, which helps to complete a lot of the Incubation checklist. Spam Assassin, Directory, and Geronimo are all examples of projects that should spend more time than the preceding in the Incubator. They are all intended to be top-level projects. However, the PPMC mechanism enables each to participate directly in the management of the project, and so far the feedback from the actual participants in that process has been entirely positive. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
> I would like to see the "cheerful"/"considerate" incubation. So do we all. > > The Incubator's purpose is to ensure that projects coming into the ASF > > - are legally clean, > > - that their communities are healthy, > > - and that they follow basic ASF policies/procedures. > I agree with this, too. IMHO, the problem seems ... You might actually want to look at the form used to help evaluate a project's status. The process is very straightforward and there is no reason for conflict. > I'd like to know why there could be a lot of "far from beta" > projects in incubator. (Really are they "far from beta"?) They are "far from beta" in that the code for Lenya, XMLBeans and Spam Assassin is mature and stable. But that does not mean that the projects yet satisfy the three criteria above. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
I've lost track of who's working on krell nowadays. I'm actually not as interested in the code as the data. If we had some kind of record (like a FOAF file) that we stick krell, and planet* and whatever data in, that would be good. We're starting to have data all over the place. members.txt, urls.txt, and probably more that I'm not remembering. Be nice to have an authoritative file that can generate all the rest (in their existing formats so as not to break working code). Ted On Jan 8, 2004, at 12:41 PM, Ben Hyde wrote: I like the planetapache.org approach. It mimize the coordination costs of getting something up and running. I'd encourage putting any stuff into the committer repository so you can parasite on the infrastructure to allow everybody to pitch in who cares to and just publish the results to the planetapache thang. If it helps, feel free to stick someplace in krell, or not :-). If you don't want to use perl in krell just, that's cool; I think we already have some Java. I'd love to see a 'project' that uses 7-12 different languages ;-) - ben On Jan 8, 2004, at 2:15 PM, Ted Leung wrote: Thom already registered planetapache.org and volunteered to host if. If the ASF changes is mind and wants to host it, I'm sure that could be arranged. On Jan 8, 2004, at 11:11 AM, Sander Temme wrote: Let's just register planetapache.org and be done with it. +1 +1 Would the Foundation handle that, and host it, or would that have to be a private initiative? S. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.temme.net/sander/ PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ted Leung Blog: http://www.sauria.com/blog PGP Fingerprint: 1003 7870 251F FA71 A59A CEE3 BEBA 2B87 F5FC 4B42 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ted Leung Blog: http://www.sauria.com/blog PGP Fingerprint: 1003 7870 251F FA71 A59A CEE3 BEBA 2B87 F5FC 4B42 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Noel, > > Ceremony. I suspect it that even such a nice community has to > > be baptized once. (one day or less) > > Legitimatization, in order to keep *consistency* in a big > > and social community. To make it orthodox. > No, Incubation has nothing to do with pomp and circumstance. Pomp? .. I do not think "it" is pomp. What makes "it" pomp might be the intentions/hearts of the interested parties. I would like to see the "cheerful"/"considerate" incubation. However, > The Incubator's purpose is to ensure that projects coming into the ASF > - are legally clean, > - that their communities are healthy, > - and that they follow basic ASF policies/procedures. I agree with this, too. IMHO, the problem seems that the last two purposes listed here can not be measured in scientific way. Also, i am afraid it that 99% of the participants in incubator would be not laywers. How can you, non-laywers, judge whether XYZ project is legally clean/safe or not, by the way? (Sorry for such a childish question) ... Incubator project PMC has at least three laywers? Also, I'd like to know why there could be a lot of "far from beta" projects in incubator. (Really are they "far from beta"?) I am happy to see the "nurturing" incubation process & projects, which can be also suitable for http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Points/ http://www.w3.org/2003/06/Process-20030618/ -- From the stand point of the "affinity" to the other apache.org projects ...: I think it that it takes over a month. First Step: "Accredited ASF Sister Project" (1) Second Step: "Incubated Project" (2) Third Step: "ASF Project" (3) ... *maybe* this is good. (not sure) ... I think it that XYZ project coming to apache can get "affinity" to the other apache.org projects during (1) process/step. (1) would not have to do with legal issues. -- Thank you for reading. - Tetsuya Kitahata -- Terra-International, Inc. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.terra-intl.com/ http://www.apache.org/~tetsuya/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 01:05, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > > Unrelated to whether or not we would use it, I think that blojsom could > be a > > > very nice ASF project. From what I have seen of it, I'd support its > entry > > > to the Incubator. > > > Does it seem sensible to take an already successful ASL licensed, > > community developed piece of software by an already successful > > open source developer and force it into a somewhat beta status by > > making it go through the incubator "just because that is the way > > things are done"? > > The Incubator's purpose is to ensure that projects coming into the ASF > > - are legally clean, > - that their communities are healthy, > - and that they follow basic ASF policies/procedures. > > In my opinion, some projects are spending too long in the Incubator because > they aren't focusing on getting out. Also, define too long. I think that an external project* coming to the ASF has quite a lot of stuff to process. Getting out within a month would surprise me. *) As in, no affilliation with the ASF, no ASF committers there at all, etc. > If a project is a successful, ASF license, community-developed piece of > software, then it need not stay long in the Incubator. However, ASF > projects are supposed to be developed by communities, because it is > important that the project survive beyond the interests of any particular > participant. That is why two of the purposes for Incubation are to ensure > that there is a healthy developing COMMUNITY, and that it is following basic > ASF policies. > > Cocoon's Lenya project and XML's XMLBeans project are far from "beta > status." And the same can be said for SpamAssassin. The SA crowd is cool to work with. They are making an effort to get the steps done to become a full ASF project. I remember a comment from one of them about incubation being more useful then he originally thought. That made me smile. > As noted by multiple projects in the Incubator: "Incubation is > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects. While > incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the completeness or > stability of the code, it does indicate that the project has yet to be fully > endorsed by the ASF." > > Endorsement by the ASF is based upon with the belief that a project's IP is > clean, and that it has developed a healthy community that will ensure its > long term viability. We incubate projects to ensure those things, not for > ceremony or "just because that is the way things are done." +1. Sander - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > Unrelated to whether or not we would use it, I think that blojsom could be a > > very nice ASF project. From what I have seen of it, I'd support its entry > > to the Incubator. > Does it seem sensible to take an already successful ASL licensed, > community developed piece of software by an already successful > open source developer and force it into a somewhat beta status by > making it go through the incubator "just because that is the way > things are done"? The Incubator's purpose is to ensure that projects coming into the ASF - are legally clean, - that their communities are healthy, - and that they follow basic ASF policies/procedures. In my opinion, some projects are spending too long in the Incubator because they aren't focusing on getting out. If a project is a successful, ASF license, community-developed piece of software, then it need not stay long in the Incubator. However, ASF projects are supposed to be developed by communities, because it is important that the project survive beyond the interests of any particular participant. That is why two of the purposes for Incubation are to ensure that there is a healthy developing COMMUNITY, and that it is following basic ASF policies. Cocoon's Lenya project and XML's XMLBeans project are far from "beta status." As noted by multiple projects in the Incubator: "Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects. While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF." Endorsement by the ASF is based upon with the belief that a project's IP is clean, and that it has developed a healthy community that will ensure its long term viability. We incubate projects to ensure those things, not for ceremony or "just because that is the way things are done." --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Single Location for syndicated Apache blogs
Quoting "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Tetsuya, > > > Ceremony. I suspect it that even such a nice community has to > > be baptized once. (one day or less) > > Legitimatization, in order to keep *consistency* in a big > > and social community. To make it orthodox. > > No, Incubation has nothing to do with pomp and circumstance. > > --- Noel > So if it's not a formality that all new ASF projects should undergo, who decides if a project should be incubated or if it can go directly to being a regular project? -- Dave Brondsema http://www.brondsema.net - personal http://www.splike.com - programming - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
