Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Aaron Bannert wrote: I noticed that you think the incubator PMC is responsible for doing the *work* of incubation. That is a false assumption. The Incubator is a place where new projects can be incubated. The contributors to the Incubator are those people who want to accomplish incubation. Anyone can contribute. The PMC exists solely for oversight of the process, not to implement the process. Oversite implies some level of involvement - if there is oversite, then it is part of the process, and therefore anyone doing oversite is implementing their part of the process. I don't see how you can be responsible and not also be involved at some level. That's having your cake and eating it too. I'm starting to lean strongly towards a model of the Incubation project providing the standards and procedures that assist those responsible for the incubation of a particular project (the shepherd/mentor and the "owning" PMC) in the discharge of their duties. Cheers, Berin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 7/30/2003 10:43 AM, Aaron Bannert wrote: On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 09:49 AM, Steven Noels wrote: If the STATUS file hasn't been updated in 3 months, and you see something that needs fixing, update it yourself! I noticed that you think the incubator PMC is responsible for doing the *work* of incubation. That is a false assumption. The Incubator is a place where new projects can be incubated. The contributors to the Incubator are those people who want to accomplish incubation. Anyone can contribute. The PMC exists solely for oversight of the process, not to implement the process. I'm pretty sure _nobody_ thinks the incubator PMC is responsible for doing any actual incubation work, except for setting out the guidelines. Pardon me, but if they fail in doing that, and in the mean time prove to be counterproductive by shielding away documents from people who are actually helping incubating projects, well What kind of guidelines would you like to see? 1. After a PMC has approved acceptance of a project for incubation and in the mean time while you are waiting for infrastructure resources to be created, please hold your e-mail discussions in [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. The necessary documents (CLA, software-grant, etc) are a location X. If location X is only accessible to a member, ask your shepherd to get them for you 3. The naming policy for project mailing lists, cvs-repos, etc is X 4. Here is what you can expect the incubator project to do, and here is what you have to do yourself. What specific activities do you consider counterproductive, and how do you propose we improve them? It would really help if stuff like 1-4 were decided and posted on the incubator site. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 30/07/2003 19:43 Aaron Bannert wrote: What kind of guidelines would you like to see? What specific activities do you consider counterproductive, and how do you propose we improve them? As much as your suggestions drive me towards a direction I'm already fully aware of, I think this situation is very comparable with the start of a new code-related project. If there's no code to play with, there's only a slim chance a community will form. I reckon much 'code' is already present within the Incubator project, still people do find it quite unobvious to start playing with it, because of its distributed character perhaps, or the unclear overall design. Much of the Incubator documents remain unfinished, which indeed creates a nice work area for people caring about the Incubator project. OTOH, the way the Incubator is being put forward happens to be very demotivational, especially for people who are already involved in various other ASF related efforts and find themselves being dragged into the Incubator project only circumstantial. There's a certain tendency to downplay ongoing incubation efforts if they are not fully executioned from within the reigns of the Incubator PMC, and one can get sick of hearing he should help the PMC instead of the incubating project. Don't underestimate the social aspect of all this. I know the Incubator is important for the ASF, but that doesn't mean one must become a committer of it or PMC member if he wants to help an incubating project. The good thing of all this is that, by now, it's becoming crystal-clear (at least to me), that the Incubator project should really be a library of guidelines and nothing more. Since I'm much more of a hands-on guy rather than a rules builder, I'm finding it hard to focus on rules rather than on the problem at hand (= XMLBeans' incubation). This shouldn't be a problem if rules builders cooperate rather than point fingers, and someone tries to transcribe the efforts of the hand-on guys into a pragmatical set of rules. I'm very grateful to see Berin apparently trying to do so. I'd rather collaborate rather than just comment, but I don't want to raise expectations which I can't meet after being admitted. Modesty. (If you don't have CVS commit, ask for it. In the mean time, post patches if you see something that needs changing. The fastest way to get commit to *any* ASF project is to post so many patches to the development list that the committers can't keep up and eventually just give you direct access. :) I'm fully aware of all that. I'm not a karma whore however, since I'm already pretty much occupied with my current karma. ;-) -- Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > My opinion is that we will continue to meander around until someone > who gives a rat's ass about some new project volunteers to set up > the incubation process. Right now, nobody even wants to chair the PMC > because anyone who attempts to lead is shot down and everyone who wants > to create a new project is unwilling to work on documenting its > progress. as stated earlier, i give a rat's arse and i volunteer. :-) -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 30/07/2003 18:21 Aaron Bannert wrote: Yes, please discuss it here on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private email is the absolute worst place for these types of discussions. That private mail, and even IRL talk, started literally _months_ ago when Cliff from BEA approached me during a tradeshow to talk about the eventual donation of XMLBeans to ASF. Given BEA's relative inexperience with ASF, some reasons of discretion, the turbulent discussions about process during Tapestry's incubation, and the long list of failures amongst the projects listed on http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFProposalPages, the proposal has been created offlist, but with a board member cc'ed on the most critical exchanges. That way, Cliff was able to come up with a well-crafted proposal, without getting drowned in discussions like these, which have nothing to do with content, and much with style & process. While I value process, process should help and encourage rather than obstruct progress. After the proposal has been put live, I'm pretty sure the remaining private conversation is only about administrative details, like the correct spelling of cliff's account/first name and all that. Nothing harmful at all. If the STATUS file hasn't been updated in 3 months, and you see something that needs fixing, update it yourself! I noticed that you think the incubator PMC is responsible for doing the *work* of incubation. That is a false assumption. The Incubator is a place where new projects can be incubated. The contributors to the Incubator are those people who want to accomplish incubation. Anyone can contribute. The PMC exists solely for oversight of the process, not to implement the process. I'm pretty sure _nobody_ thinks the incubator PMC is responsible for doing any actual incubation work, except for setting out the guidelines. Pardon me, but if they fail in doing that, and in the mean time prove to be counterproductive by shielding away documents from people who are actually helping incubating projects, well -- Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 7/29/2003 2:54 PM, Paul Hammant wrote: Folks, It seems there is enough discord over XMLBeans here, to warrant letting one slide for the sake of the peace. If CVS is set-up, let it be as is. If Mail lists are set-up, let them be as they are. - - - For future projects the PMC has decided that whilst in incubator, how about the following? It's refactored from prior chat, and common sense ? 1) [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the designated email address for user and developer chatter. A third-party or other apache hosted mail list is not within the Apache spirit and the intent of Incubator as set up, thus is not approved. +1. Some of this should be added to http://incubator.apache.org/process.html 2) CVS module will be 'incubator-subProjectName' (not with standing that there was some chatter about directories inside 'incubator-projects' for each sub project). All code is to come from the outside and be relabelled and relicensed at the outset. Any modules/jars depended on are to be clearly listed and appropriately licensed. The project team bringing code to the incubator are not to leave some subtle dependency to an external to Apache bit of code which may be essentially under the control of the committers and designed for the sub-project. +1. The stuff on modules/jars and dependencies to external to Apache code should get added to http://incubator.apache.org/process.html 3) Web sites will be hosted at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/subProjectName. Project teams will desist and redirect web sites formerly the home of the project. The new site hosted at Apache will not refer to any commercial or open source 'value added' site dedicated to the new sub-project in anything other than a secondary links page. +1. Add this to to http://incubator.apache.org/process.html Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 7/29/2003 3:06 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: On 7/29/03 2:11 PM, "Ted Leung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 7/29/2003 10:33 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: On 7/29/03 1:01 PM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is an excellent idea. Why are you blaming the XMLBeans guys for your not having your act together? It's all well and good for them to introduce themselves, but that's not what is holding us up right now. Right now, we're held up because we don't have a public mailing list where we can see whether their behavior matches their talk. They can say all they want about how they want to work as a community and allow non BEA developers and so forth, but we need to see them doing that. I thought that was the point of incubation. Ted, Perhaps you didn't mean to reply to me, rather Nicola Ken. I was replying to a bunch of people in one e-mail. In the section above, I was in fact replying to Nicola Ken. You do realize that I'm neither a member of the Incubator PMC nor do I support its existence. Create the mail list. The name shouldn't be up to the Incubator, it should be up to the XML PMC. Its you're baby, you're birthing it. Right now you're forced to do it here. I already asked infrastructure@ for this. You're a member, call for its dissolution. Unfortunately, there is still a contingent of people that like the idea (regardless of its unsuccessful implementation) so I doubt you'll get consensus to dissolve it. More than likely you'll be chided on how you should JOIN the Incubator PMC... I'm going to see if its possible to get the XMLBeans guys through this thing. And we're going to document the whole experience so that we have a case if it becomes necessary to go to the board and members to cut this thing down. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 7/29/2003 2:50 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: I've no issue with rules, except when we say we have rules but can't articulate them. Example #1. What should the names of the mailing lists and CVS be? [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] We don't have that rule. Nicola Ken suggested creating such a rule. My opinion is that we will continue to meander around until someone who gives a rat's ass about some new project volunteers to set up the incubation process. Right now, nobody even wants to chair the PMC because anyone who attempts to lead is shot down and everyone who wants to create a new project is unwilling to work on documenting its progress. I'm willing up to a certain point to do some work on this. My frustration is that the incubator has existed for quite some time, and should already have some project guidelines like the ones that I referred to. The reason that people don't want to work on documenting the progress is that they don't like the process. They were told to go through the process by the ASF. Inside the ASF we have been told to use the incubator (whether we like it or not). People who signed up to be on the incubator volunteered to do the work of setting up guidelines and giving advice to new projects. So where are the guidelines? Where is the board oversight of the incubator as a project? In other words, there are insufficient volunteers to accept any new projects at Apache right now. Please come back at a later date, or volunteer to do the work and I'll give you cvs access. This is not true. Steven Noels, myself, and Berin Lautenbach are working to get this project into Apache. I certainly didn't know that I was volunteering to do the Incubator PMC's job for it. I already have CVS access for incubator. I'd much rather you gave me root and apmail so that I can create the stuff that this project needs. Fortunately for the incubator PMC, Cliff and Berin are willing to do some work to improve the incubator process. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Folks, It seems there is enough discord over XMLBeans here, to warrant letting one slide for the sake of the peace. If CVS is set-up, let it be as is. If Mail lists are set-up, let them be as they are. - - - For future projects the PMC has decided that whilst in incubator, how about the following? It's refactored from prior chat, and common sense ? 1) [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the designated email address for user and developer chatter. A third-party or other apache hosted mail list is not within the Apache spirit and the intent of Incubator as set up, thus is not approved. 2) CVS module will be 'incubator-subProjectName' (not with standing that there was some chatter about directories inside 'incubator-projects' for each sub project). All code is to come from the outside and be relabelled and relicensed at the outset. Any modules/jars depended on are to be clearly listed and appropriately licensed. The project team bringing code to the incubator are not to leave some subtle dependency to an external to Apache bit of code which may be essentially under the control of the committers and designed for the sub-project. 3) Web sites will be hosted at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/subProjectName. Project teams will desist and redirect web sites formerly the home of the project. The new site hosted at Apache will not refer to any commercial or open source 'value added' site dedicated to the new sub-project in anything other than a secondary links page. 4) Downloads will be hosted at Apache under the usual mechanisms Thoughts ? - Paul -- http://www.thoughtworks.com -> The art of heavy lifting. Home for many Agile practicing, Open Source activists... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 7/29/2003 10:33 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: On 7/29/03 1:01 PM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: After spending considerable time off-list with Cliff preparing his proposal, I'm getting a bit weary with all this rules stuff ASF is incorporated. We have certain rules to abide to, like licensing et all. And also internal rules, that you know quite well, about voting, and about infrastructure policies. I've no issue with rules, except when we say we have rules but can't articulate them. Example #1. What should the names of the mailing lists and CVS be? [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] And see, I don't think you're the person who should be responsible for them Nicola Ken. I think the XML PMC/Steven should. If they don't have time or are unable to, then the project should not be under their oversight because it will be their continuing responsibility. Just because you seal the ship with turpentine doesn't mean it won't sink later if you never do it again. I am here representing the XML PMC. I've been *waiting* for the incubator PMC to make up its mind on how to name projects, and now I am *waiting* for infrastructure to create some resources (and yes, I know they are busy with minotaur, and I am cutting them some slack). I'm not willing to cut the high and mighty incubator PMC some slack for rules and policy that should have been in place for a year and the failure to document such.. It's fine for us to come out with the high and mighty Apache way, but when we don't have basic stuff like this in order it makes us look bad. As a n ASF member, member of 2 PMCs, and former PMC chair, I find this to be an embarassment. If the incubator is incapable of doing its job then maybe an ASF member needs to introduce a resolution calling for its dissolution. Which rules make you so tired? I just blocked the creation of some resources for less than a week, and you are already tired? It takes years to build good communities, and patience is a virtue. I don't honestly think that some days will ruin it all. Suggestion: why don't we get to know the XMLBeans guys better? What about if each of them sends us a mail with a brief bio and expectations? That is an excellent idea. Why are you blaming the XMLBeans guys for your not having your act together? It's all well and good for them to introduce themselves, but that's not what is holding us up right now. Right now, we're held up because we don't have a public mailing list where we can see whether their behavior matches their talk. They can say all they want about how they want to work as a community and allow non BEA developers and so forth, but we need to see them doing that. I thought that was the point of incubation. I think it would be great for the XMLBeans team to introduce themselves. Maybe you'd rather that [EMAIL PROTECTED] took up the slack for [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's fine with me too. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 29/07/2003 10:41 Berin Lautenbach wrote: Steven Noels wrote: and see to bring XMLBeans where people can actually help them out. Apart from Nicola's apparent efforts in keeping the Incubator alive, most of the real action is done by infrastructure peeps, and the dispersed shepherds of incubating projects, most of them assumably under the umbrella of the XML/Jakarta PMC. Let's keep it that way, and keep the incubating projects close to an active PMC. But being careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. I would have said there is real value in the Incubator defining and fleshing out a process that is used by the various PMCs for incubation. Totally agree with that, of course, although I find this hard to find back in what Nicola has been up to this far (sorry to say so). I'm willing to help out since I firmly believe in the need for a good acceptance/incubation process and tangible help for fledgling new Apache projects (and growth of new ASF projects is unavoidable, necessary, even healthy IMHO) - OTOH I feel a certain tendency towards overregulation and protectionism which I don't find inspiring. But maybe it is my persistent lack of time preventing me to fully jump in the waters, causing me to seek false argumentation not being able to cooperate on policy making - oh well. After spending considerable time off-list with Cliff preparing his proposal, I'm getting a bit weary with all this rules stuff - which doesn't mean rules are not important. But they shouldn't mess up the spirit, which is the real difference between Apache and the outside open source world. -- Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Steven Noels wrote: and see to bring XMLBeans where people can actually help them out. Apart from Nicola's apparent efforts in keeping the Incubator alive, most of the real action is done by infrastructure peeps, and the dispersed shepherds of incubating projects, most of them assumably under the umbrella of the XML/Jakarta PMC. Let's keep it that way, and keep the incubating projects close to an active PMC. But being careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. I would have said there is real value in the Incubator defining and fleshing out a process that is used by the various PMCs for incubation. It might even oversite the process at a high level to ensure consistency accross all incoming projects. I think there might also need to be someone to look after projects that are going to come in at the top level - i.e. not under the auspices of another Apache project. A lot of the current Incubator documentation focuses on that case. (Harping on a subject) - a charter/mission statement would be good :>. The stuff on wiki is a first stab at roles and responsibilities - can we start with that and flesh out? Cheers, Berin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
On 25/07/2003 14:09 Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Andrew C. Oliver wrote, On 25/07/2003 14.05: No this is difference than in the past. Remember the Incubator is here to help and its OUR responsibility to incubate? Its sounding like the incubator stands over and tells folks what to do not only in helpful ways but in details too. Responsible means responsible, nothing less, nothing more. Don't confuse responsibility with micro-management. I am back from holidays so only lightly surfing the mail avalanche after being two weeks offline, but I'm slowly beginning to resonate with Andy's line of action. Maybe they are bred on Andy's experiences during Tapestry's 'incubation', but given the fact Cliff/BEA/theXMLBeansPeeps are quite new to all this self-management and the Apache Way, and the fact that Nicola seems to be overly reluctant because of what happened/is still happening with Lenya (him being one of the main supporters of their incubation at that time), I would propose not to overregulate all this, and see to bring XMLBeans where people can actually help them out. Apart from Nicola's apparent efforts in keeping the Incubator alive, most of the real action is done by infrastructure peeps, and the dispersed shepherds of incubating projects, most of them assumably under the umbrella of the XML/Jakarta PMC. Let's keep it that way, and keep the incubating projects close to an active PMC. -- Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Look, if instead of the "Incubation PMC" it was the "XML PMC", would it have been less confusing? Not sure :>. Other projects (such as XML) are aimed at development in some technical area. There are a bunch of processes that are common accross Apache that support development. (Voting, committing etc.) Those processes drive the other projects. The Incubator project is aimed at something different. It's there to support the process of "on-boarding" code bases and other products into the Apache community. That process is unique to the Incubator. You could almost argue that in other projects, the processes exist to support the projects, but the Incubator project is the other way round - it exists to support the Incubation process. Personally, I reckon you are short-changing yourselves if you put forward the idea that the Incubator PMC is just like any other PMC. I think you play a different role and should celebrate it :>. It's incredibly valuable. But that's personal opinion, so I'll shut up now. Again, don't confuse responsibility with "who does the work". In our case, ATM, the Incubator PMC basically controls that things don't go out of bounds. As for making the project proceed, it takes someone else for that, hence the sheperd or mentor thing. I don't think I am, but I also believe that it's important to articulate responsibilities outside those of the PMC. We are still learning and need fresh helpers, of you will join the effort and keep helping like you do now, with suggestions and questions, it will slowly get better :-) And I do apologise for the long discussion. You have almost certainly been through it before, but it has helped me understand a bit better. With Cliff (not Chris :>) I'll do what I can to document my understandings. Might short-circuit the conversations in future. Cheers, Berin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Berin Lautenbach wrote, On 27/07/2003 10.48: Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Which is one of the things I'm having problems grappling with at the moment. Exactly what are the responsibilities of the various parties in this process? It's simple: The Incubator PMC is responsible for the project. All others (can) help. Not sure I understand? (Call me slow :>). I'm more trying to determine how that responsibility is realised. > So for example, there is a requirement for a shepherd. That person has a set of responsibilities. What are they? The shepherd not on the Incubator project has no more responsibilities than the ones from the project itself or the ones of any other Apache committer. The incubator shepherd has the responsibilities that any other Incubator project member has. Nothing different from the XML PMC. How is this oversited by the Incubator PMC? Reading the mailing lists, the help of the incubator/non-incubator shepherd, the status file of the project in the incubator CVS. And also - what is the PMC not responsible for? I've seen in various places that the Incubator makes no decisions on technical merits (makes sense) of a new project/sub-project. The PMC is responsible for everything, but as with any PMC, does not decide on technical merits. Nothing different from the XML PMC. I notice in the STATUS file for the overall project, there is a plan for a set of bylaws for the project. I think that would be a great help. +1 It looks like this is all very much understood by those more intimately involved in the incubation process. For those of us coming in cold, it's a tad confusing. Well, it's because it seems that there are some strange ideas WRT what incubation is. Look, if instead of the "Incubation PMC" it was the "XML PMC", would it have been less confusing? Again, don't confuse responsibility with "who does the work". In our case, ATM, the Incubator PMC basically controls that things don't go out of bounds. As for making the project proceed, it takes someone else for that, hence the sheperd or mentor thing. We are still learning and need fresh helpers, of you will join the effort and keep helping like you do now, with suggestions and questions, it will slowly get better :-) -- 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Which is one of the things I'm having problems grappling with at the moment. Exactly what are the responsibilities of the various parties in this process? It's simple: The Incubator PMC is responsible for the project. All others (can) help. Not sure I understand? (Call me slow :>). I'm more trying to determine how that responsibility is realised. So for example, there is a requirement for a shepherd. That person has a set of responsibilities. What are they? How is this oversited by the Incubator PMC? And also - what is the PMC not responsible for? I've seen in various places that the Incubator makes no decisions on technical merits (makes sense) of a new project/sub-project. I notice in the STATUS file for the overall project, there is a plan for a set of bylaws for the project. I think that would be a great help. It looks like this is all very much understood by those more intimately involved in the incubation process. For those of us coming in cold, it's a tad confusing. Cheers, Berin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Andrew C. Oliver wrote, On 25/07/2003 14.05: On 7/25/03 7:46 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's simple: The Incubator PMC is responsible for the project. All others (can) help. No this is difference than in the past. Remember the Incubator is here to help and its OUR responsibility to incubate? Its sounding like the incubator stands over and tells folks what to do not only in helpful ways but in details too. Responsible means responsible, nothing less, nothing more. Don't confuse responsibility with micro-management. -- 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Berin Lautenbach wrote, On 25/07/2003 9.07: Andrew C. Oliver wrote: IMHO it depends on what the incubator PMC does. If they *do* create the lists and the such then maybe they should set policy (meaning telling other people what do do == policy). If they rely on the XML project and the XMLBeans folks to do things then they should allow the XML project and XMLBeans folks to set their own policy. I am frutrated too, but I'm not ranting. Sorry, but it does not help anyone to start ranting. You know how much time sometimes is needed to take decisions in project, and the Incubator is a project itself. Which is one of the things I'm having problems grappling with at the moment. Exactly what are the responsibilities of the various parties in this process? It's simple: The Incubator PMC is responsible for the project. All others (can) help. ... Tell me what I need to do, and I'll do it. http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/incubator/STATUS?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/incubator/projects/ I'll try to update the site docs ASAP. Please be patient, we need help. -- 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: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
Andrew C. Oliver wrote: IMHO it depends on what the incubator PMC does. If they *do* create the lists and the such then maybe they should set policy (meaning telling other people what do do == policy). If they rely on the XML project and the XMLBeans folks to do things then they should allow the XML project and XMLBeans folks to set their own policy. Which is one of the things I'm having problems grappling with at the moment. Exactly what are the responsibilities of the various parties in this process? Incubator PMC? Incubator team? (Is there such a thing?) Sponsoring Project PMC? Shepherd? New project? Tell me what I need to do, and I'll do it. It's extremely frustrating to be in a situation where there is no clear direction, except to be told what you can't do when it's suggested. To be fair - that's a little heavy handed, particularly coming from an interested bystander. But (as Aaron notes in a later e-mail) this is a fairly trivial thing. If getting something trivial sorted out is this difficult, it doesn't do much for one's confidence. Cheers, Berin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Policy for incubating project resources (was Re: xmlbeansproject )
This is embarrassing. How can we have incubated several projects and not have this worked out? No wonder people are complaining about the incubator. Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Since IMHO this has been already discussed enough and different POVs remain, I ask for a vote on the following. What should we use as a policy in creating resources for incubating projects? [ ] project-subproject CVS [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ ] incubator-subproject CVS [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please vote. Here is mine: [X] incubator-subproject CVS [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
