Re: [VOTE] Proposal for Tobago, an Apache MyFaces subproject
Ok, I think we can close this vote out - what do you say? Next step is then to request accounts, right? regards, Martin On 8/31/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since a software grant is involved, we do need to incubate the code. So, we are at the step where The Incubator PMC MAY immediately accept the Candidate, or may (at the discretion of the Incubator PMC) require a successful VOTE by the Incubator PMC. If no one responds negatively to the VOTE thread, I expect we can take that as lazy consensus and proceed. Cliff's new rules about the ACK would explain how the PMC MAY immediately accept the Candidate, so for now, consider the +1 my ACK as a member of the Incubator PMC. -Ted. -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Trainings in English and German - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a few steps before approving a project
David Reid wrote: Cliff asked me to reply on this subject following the discussions on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not trying to interfere, just add some thoughts from someone sitting on the outside looking in. snip/ - add a question to the template asking whether the person(s) proposing are aware of similar open source projects inside or outside the ASF. I'm not suggesting that a project wouldn't get approved if there is some similar high profile open source project, but at least we are explicitly asking the question and getting the information. When people submit a proposal they've invested their time and effort in getting to that point, and they probably know the projects that are related in the open source (and probably commercial) world quite well. Asking them to list them and give some background about where the proposed project will sit seems like a logical step and one that will help those making the evaluation consider the wider ramifications. As Cliff says, I don't think a proposal should be rejected just because there is a similar project in existance, but knowing about the other projects makes it easier to judge the merits and likely impact of the project. And, as I said elsewhere, on top of asking what other open source projects exist in the same space, we should ask if there is any overlap between the proposed project and those other open source projects. Is our project being seeded with their source code? will we have any committers in common? Is this a fork? Is this a transfer, including community? Has this been checked with the 'project owner' of the other project? That sort of thing. To my mind, that is the information you are trying to identify, not just whether there are any other competing OSS projects. Regards, Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Proposal for Tobago, an Apache MyFaces subproject
On 8/31/05, Sanjiva Weerawarana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, as the rules stand right now, if you have a PMC that has voted to accept the project then you don't even need a vote here; you're simply good to go. Yeah, I was surprised too but that's the rules as they are now. Sanjiva. If that's the case, then let's wait 72 hours from my +1, and, if there are no comments, then proceed with sandbox incubation of the Tobago code. Once the software grant is on file, for simplicity, we can post the code to the sandbox area of the MyFaces repository, but mark it as being under incubation. For simplicity, we could use the MyFaces mailing lists for now, and just ask people posting about Tobago to put a [Tobago] label in the subject line. In this way, we can get a better gauge of how the existing MyFaces users and developers will react to Tobago. We' can do the usual page on the incubator site, tracking our progress with integrating Tobago with the MyFaces community, and when we are done, we can let the Incubator PMC know we are ready to exit. -Ted.
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Cliff, - change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official charter) to include approving of all new projects To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to second guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects. - ensure all proposals use the same standard template Fine. - add a question to the template asking whether the person(s) proposing are aware of similar open source projects inside or outside the ASF. To what end? I know what is motivating this. In my view, any group that wants to part of the ASF, under our IP and Community policies, is welcomed. The ASF should not be in the business of forbidding people to work on things here just because someone else feels that it should be happening in their fiefdom. We don't even require uniqueness within the ASF, much less between us and other groups. Should JAMES insist that the HTTP Server project shut down mod_smtpd? And what if such a project involves forking another communities code and claiming some of their committers? Does it not concern you _how_ that happens, and how it makes the ASF look? In my mind, it isn't a question of whether or not a project should start, but that the ASF should _know_ the baggage that a project will bring with it, and the issues it might bring in relation to other projects, so that we can ensure that the starting of the new project maintains rather than degrades our relations with other projects. That's all this is about in my book. If I were to be in a position to decide about an incubating project, I'd like to know who might be offended by the starting of that project _before_ I make my decision - even if I decide to accept it. It just makes life easier, and more predictable all-round. consider having a formal liaison at a few key external open source communities to give a friendly notice to whenever the Incubator PMC knows there's a proposal that could be controversial I am in favor of liaisons with other communities, but even making the judgment call required above is claiming a subjective value. Well yes. That's the judgement call that ultimately is going to have to come from the original proposing PMC, or the people making the proposal. They're the ones who know the landscape. Hence the need for questions on the proposal template to prompt them to tell us. require that the Incubator PMC loops in the PRC on any project that could have any chance of media attention (either because of there overall significance of the project, the potential for controversy, expected vendor press releases, or the opportunity to release a joint statement with some other organization). EVERY project should involve the PRC. The PRC is entirely underused, even if overcommitted. And don't forget that contrary to what was said on this thread, existing PMCs *can* start their own projects from existing ASF committers and new codebases that are developed within the ASF infrastructure without going through the Incubator. The motivation for your e-mail would apply to those as well. Not so much in my mind. If there's no interaction in terms of code or committers, but only in 'subject area', then it is more just plain old competition. We may want to consider competitors, but this discussion isn't about competitors, it is about people who might be directly affected by our actions - e.g we fork their code. Regards, Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Proposal for Tobago, an Apache MyFaces subproject
Well, I didn't argument against using the incubator infrastructure. Nobody seemed too interested here, though (in contradiction to the MyFaces community, who was very interested), that's why Ted probably thought about going through the MyFaces sandbox directly as a code grant is already in place and the licensing issue is very clear. No problem at all for going through a separate incubator SVN - Ted ? and thanks for at least some feedback to this proposal ;) regards, Martin On 9/6/05, Niclas Hedhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 01 September 2005 03:51, Ted Husted wrote: Once the software grant is on file, for simplicity, we can post the code to the sandbox area of the MyFaces repository, but mark it as being under incubation. When MerlinStudio was brought into Avalon, the codebase went via the Incubator SVN, and we had no choice about that. Moving things around in SVN is easy, so there is no real argument against it. We' can do the usual page on the incubator site, tracking our progress This part is not optional. s/can/will/ The above mentioned MerlinStudio had a very similar situation to Tobago, and travelled thru the incubator in something like 2 weeks, including the removal of a Hibernate dependency, so play the Incubator cards nicely and you are out of here faster than this thread of discussion :o) Cheers Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Trainings in English and German - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
