Re: [VOTE] Put Apache Juice into dormant status

2007-07-19 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Hiya, Nobody on the project has the bandwidth at the moment to take this on, so +1 to put it dormant. If the bandwidth becomes available we will re-open. Cheers, Berin Noel J. Bergman wrote: Berin Lautenbach wrote: I have forwarded into the santuario dev list to see what people

Re: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership

2006-10-04 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: - We want a podling to generate a community, but the first bit of community they build (the communal decision in a proposal as to who is allowed to commit) we decide we want to ignore. Even worse, we now don't even want to allow them to even suggest that list - we want

Re: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership

2006-10-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Roy T. Fielding wrote: The people listed in the proposal as committers are the PPMC. If some project allows too many people to jump on the proposal at the beginning in order to make the proposal look better to Apache, then they are stuck with the results. Don't like that answer? Then

Re: Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire

2006-09-29 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Out of curiosity - has any such internal decision been made? I can not find anything in either of the archives - private or dev. Cheers, Berin Jim Jagielski wrote: I will defer to those on the PPMC that had issues with the list. On Sep 29, 2006, at 11:31 AM, Dan Diephouse wrote:

Re: Ode proposal

2006-02-18 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Alan D. Cabrera wrote: OT: I dislike the current trend of people using +1, -1, for simple conversations. It confuses people and should be reserved for votes. The use of +1/-1 for conversations (as apposed to votes) is very common through the ASF. I've always rather liked it personally.

Re: Incubator Roles revisited

2006-02-18 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: snip As written, a Champion must be an ASF Member or Officer. Why? A Champion actually has no specific rights. Can anyone express a reason why the role should be restricted to a Member or Officer? One that comes to mind is as a filter, but realistically, anyone can

Re: [VOTE] Werner as juice committer

2006-01-19 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Geez - for some reason I thought he already was!!! +1 Cheers, Berin Davanum Srinivas wrote: As part of reviving juice, can we please VOTE werner as a committer to enable him to continue his offline work? [1] Here's my +1. thanks, dims [1] :

Re: a few steps before approving a project

2005-09-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On September 1, 2005 8:41:11 PM +1000 Berin Lautenbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are far more checks already. To get a project approved you need a full resolution signed by the board. A better analogy would be voting on a new PMC member. No PMC requires

Re: a few steps before approving a project

2005-09-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Roy T. Fielding wrote: I am generally opposed to any of the suggestions that we add more constraints to incubation (aside from a general constraint of no new projects, which I can understand for infrastructure reasons alone). What we need is more documentation, not more rules. +1

Re: stdcxx snapshot

2005-09-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: I'm not really clear what the approval process is here on the part of the full Incubator PMC. Bill, do you know? Or, is it hidden on the website somewhere? ;-) -- justin http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0D Cheers,

Re: stdcxx snapshot

2005-09-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On September 3, 2005 10:30:49 AM +1000 Berin Lautenbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0D I saw that, but it's not very helpful as it says: Such approval SHALL be given only after the Incubator

Re: a few steps before approving a project

2005-09-01 Thread Berin Lautenbach
I've been following this with a little bit of confusion. It strikes me that there is a lot of reaction going on without really thinking through the implications. So just to stir the pot Cliff Schmidt wrote: I'd like to suggest a few changes to the process of approving new project

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache TSIK

2005-05-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
First - I'm +1 on this (with the concomitant committment to help out - I'll even mentor if necessary, although my time is often limited at the moment). Noel J. Bergman wrote: This looks alright, but I have some questions. First, why isn't the WS PMC sponsoring this as WS-TSIK? The XML

Re: [VOTE] Nutch

2005-01-07 Thread Berin Lautenbach
+1 from here! Cheers, Berin Noel J. Bergman wrote: Doug proposed this a week and change ago (bad timing to do such things around major holidays :-)). So far we have support from Dain, Nicola Ken, Doug, Eric Hatcher, Henning, Roy and myself. Roy, Nicola Ken, and myself provide the minimum

Re: Mentor and Project Guide (WAS: RE: [OT] How to prevent...)

2004-10-20 Thread Berin Lautenbach
It does look good. Noel - make sure you do some heckling for me as well :. Cheers, Berin Noel J. Bergman wrote: Cliff Schmidt wrote If it's any use, you can download the slides at: http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/os2004/view/e_sess/5439 I'll be giving a similar presentation next

Re: Donation of JAXP 1.3 Sources to Apache

2004-10-13 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Neeraj Bajaj wrote: Hello All, I was wondering when can we start merging the JAXP 1.3 sources ? Merging the code in branch/review/testing/committing to main trunk would take time so at least from my side i would like to see this work started as early as possible say from tomorrow. What is the

Re: [VOTE] Accept JCR for Incubation

2004-08-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
+1 Roy T. Fielding wrote: Here is the current text of the JCR proposal from http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/JcrProposal Please cast your vote as +1 (yes), -1 (no), or something in between. Vote ends 12pm (Noon) PDT -0700, Saturday, August 28, 2004. Roy 1. Proposal for new project JCR 1.1.

Re: [VOTE] Accept MyFaces for Incubation

2004-07-09 Thread Berin Lautenbach
+1 Noel J. Bergman wrote: See: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/MyFacesProposal [ ] Accept MyFaces into the Incubator [ ] Reject MyFaces Vote ends Midnight EDT (between Monday and Tuesday), Monday July 12, 2004. --- Noel -

Re: [VOTE] Graduate XMLBeans from Incubator and recommend as top-level project

2004-06-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
+1 :. Cheers, Berin Cliff Schmidt wrote: The XMLBeans project has been actively developed in incubation for about 10 months. During this time, the user and developer community has continued to grow stronger, both in number, diversity, and degree of cooperation. In addition, the

Re: Download location for Incubator distributions

2004-06-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: As per Cliff's previous email, files will be moved on www.apache.org/dist and the XMLBeans website will be updated. Since XMLBeans appears to be about to leave the Incubator, this needn't apply to it, but as we examine Incubator policies, I'm wondering if we should make it

Re: [VOTE] Lenya 1.2 incubation distribution

2004-06-18 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: There is a request that we approve clearly marked incubation distribution of Lenya to help further community development. The request has the support for Steven Noels and others in the Lenya community. There has been considerable discussion on the state of the community in

Overall status of incubating projects

2004-05-31 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Peoples, The following lists provides my understanding (based on the projects page on incubator.apache.org) of when the last status update was. Projects with a ** have gone more than 3 months without any kind of update. No Report means that the project *appears* (according to the status file)

Lenya PPMC List

2004-05-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Peoples, I have just created a PPMC list for Lenya ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Nobody is currently subscribed (other than myself), but I have taken the liberty of setting Stefano and Steven as moderators (at their Apache addresses). Let me know if the moderators list is wrong or if anything else

Re: TLPs, Incubation, and the Board (was RE: [PROPOSAL] Beehive)

2004-05-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: I think there are some mis-understandings. Our documentation seriously lags reality (volunteers to help would be appreciated), but even so, AFAIK, you *never* needed to go to the Board before proposing entry to the Incubator. Directors might be interested, but the issue of

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Geronimo from Incubator and recommend as top-level project

2004-05-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
+1. And very enthusiastic at that. An absolutely heroic effort! Cheers, Berin Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: The Geronimo project has been in Incubation for almost 10 months. In those 10 months, the Geronimo project has developed a community, developed a new codebase in an open and

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Pluto

2004-05-15 Thread Berin Lautenbach
David, Many thanks indeed. I'm now a big +1 :. Cheers, Berin David Sean Taylor wrote: On Apr 23, 2004, at 5:49 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote: Guys, I'm going to vote -1 here, until the status file is updated addressing some of the original concerns. Andrew Oliver raised a specific

Re: Pluto Incubation

2004-05-14 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: I've published the revised Incubator site with the newly revised Pluts STATUS file for everyone to review: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/pluto.html Does anyone have any outstanding questions/issues regarding Pluto's status? I'm going to appear very thick here, for

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Pluto

2004-04-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: As far as I know, those issues are mooted. More to the point, perhaps, Pluto has been adopted and integrated into the new Portals project, which is asking for its release, and they don't appear to have any Community concerns. Do we have any questions about the TCK

Report for JuiCE

2004-04-19 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Status report for JuiCE for the Incubator JuiCE is just entering incubation, and is currently in the process of starting up. We are currently waiting on CLAs from core developers to enable us to get started. * is the STATUS file up to date? (also post link) Yes -

Re: Want to become a member of Apache J2EE Project

2004-04-12 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Have a look at http://incubator.apache.org/projects/geronimo/index.html#How+do+I+get+Involved%3F Cheers, Berin Poornima Gunasekar wrote: Hi, This is Poornima, Software Engineer. I wish to participate in the project Apache-licensed implementation of the J2EE specification. Could you

Re: New Incubee

2004-03-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
The plan at the moment is to name the new product JuiCE. A question to the incubator group - we have researched this name on the web, and could not find any other cryptographic software that had this name. There are of products on sourceforge - a blog tool [4] and a frontend to mpg123 [5]

Re: code donation to an existing project

2004-03-18 Thread Berin Lautenbach
David, Just to back up Noel's comments below, if you put something to [EMAIL PROTECTED], we can all kick it around. At the end of the day - if those in xml-commons think it's a good idea, then the chances are it probably is, and we can make it happen! Cheers, Berin Noel J. Bergman

Re: code donation to an existing project

2004-03-18 Thread Berin Lautenbach
David Crossley wrote: By the way, the Incubator FAQ needs a statement on this topic. Hmm. Yes - I think you're right. I'll do something about that! Thanks! Cheers, Berin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For

Re: Upcoming Incubator PMC Chair Election

2004-03-18 Thread Berin Lautenbach
OK. I'll start off by nominating Noel (although I think that was already done elsewhere?) I'd also suggest we timebox this. Can we allow a week for nominations? Then maybe a week for votes within the PMC? Cheers, Berin Noel J. Bergman wrote: Candidates interested in the Incubator

Re: Project Documentation

2004-03-10 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel, Moved to general (per your suggestion :), ROFL - A chance for my favourite hobby horse! Where is the charter for the Incubator? I started one some time back http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorCharterDraft But could never really get any traction or interest. A lot of

Re: Request for graduation

2004-01-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 01:15, Malte S. Stretz wrote: Where do I find that module? At least via anoncvs I can't find it and (I think) I have only SVN and no CVS access. Crap. Ok, just for the record, the SA guys have been ginea pigs with respect to SVN only accounts. It looks like it's too

Re: [VOTE] Granting committer status to log4net developers

2004-01-08 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Ceki Gülcü wrote: What is it we are voting access for here? Is it to the overall logging project repository? To a CVS module for the log4net code that is to be created? I am inclined to create a new CVS module for log4net and for each sub-project. If a log4-X committer wants to commit a

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Leo Simons wrote: IMHO, as long as a project still requires a point man (or as long as the PMC still requires such a person in order to be kept up to date of what is happening in the directory project), the project is not ready for graduation. Absolutely! A good test of maturity. If the mentor

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Aaron Bannert wrote: It's a start. But you also need the landing PMC members. What's a landing PMC member? Where the code is to go into an existing project, then the PMC of pre-existing project is the landing PMC. E.g. XML-Beans is set to enter the XML project once it leaves the icnubator,

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Healthy ASF Projects are neither leaderless nor headless. They are run by multiple heads -- individuals participating as peers -- converging on a consensus. Sometimes things may take longer than one person acting on their own, but it often means a better result, and it

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Now ... why not designate people beforehand to provide corrective action(s)? Perhaps for the reasons that Sam is often quiet as a PMC Chair, or Greg is very careful about which e-mail address he uses. Because they have found that it *does* make a difference. Once you

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-29 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Aaron Bannert wrote: On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 03:43:56PM +1100, Berin Lautenbach wrote: I'm confused by what you are saying. Do you believe there should be one person in an authoritative position for each PPMC or not? I am strongly against having roles within the ASF. Roles go against the way

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-29 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: IIUC this is what ATM we agree upon: The role of Mentor is a self-selecting title (eg. anyone wishing to become a Mentor and has the title to be one as described in our policy just adds themselves to the projects/index webpage + the project status page and joins the

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-27 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Aaron Bannert wrote: Why must it be one person? The entire Incubator PMC is responsible, so why should we limit this to one person? Not saying there should be only one mentor (in fact I would argue against it). But I do think it important to have *identified* mentors. Having said that, I

Re: PPMCs and oversight

2003-12-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: The current mechanism assumes that designated Mentors are the ones that have decided to be there, and we may assume that is there are enough Mentors, they will be there or tell us that they cannot do it anymore. If we don't have explicit Mentors... how does it work?

Help!

2003-12-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola/Noel et al, I started playing with the PPMC text, just to wordsmith a tiny bit and flesh out a few things, and realised I don't understand the entire intent :. I had been seeing the PPMC as the PMC to be - so to speak. I think that is the case for the projects that will become TLPs,

Re: Help!

2003-12-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: will all developers be on a PPMC? I wouldn't think so - I would have thought it would be like a normal TLP, where those who are guiding the project (hopefully nearly all committers - but not necessarily) will be on the PMC. All active Committers should be on the PPMC,

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] PPMCs for Incubating Projects

2003-12-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola, I only have one overall thought (and you're going to think it remarkable picky, especially at this late stage :). As an aside - is this on the wiki somewhere where we can do a bit of wordsmithing (if you don't object at such a late date :. Am also happy to play around once it is on

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] PPMCs for Incubating Projects

2003-12-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Cancel question about wiki - should have looked first. Apologies - and a very Merry Christmas! Cheers, Berin Berin Lautenbach wrote: Nicola, I only have one overall thought (and you're going to think it remarkable picky, especially at this late stage :). As an aside

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Re: request for incubation: axion database project

2003-12-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Rodney Waldhoff wrote: The notion of automatically accepting projects already accepted by a sponsor seems like a good one. It's not very clear from the process docs that this is the case. As said before, the docs are in need of a major overhaul. Hopefully, somewhere in

Re: Looking for help from incubation

2003-12-22 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Ceki, Realising that you don't necessarily need someone from the Incubator, I'd still be interested in helping out with the log4cxx piece. I need something like this elsewhere, so it seems like a perfect match. Cheers, Berin Ceki Gülcü wrote: Hello, We are looking for a member of

Re: [VOTE] Official Name for Geronimo Project

2003-12-01 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Sam Ruby wrote: The inevitable result of these two factors is an interminable discussion on the naming of a project. IMHO, the right answer is *not* to buck this up to the incubator PMC, or to members, or *gasp* to the board. A much better approach would be: 1) Have the incubator PMC

Re: [RT] Multiple Mentors

2003-11-13 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Berin Lautenbach wrote: Nicola, I suppose the only slight reservation would be who is accountable? The old Fred Bloggs is looking after that can kick in. I think the Incubator PMC also wants to be able to hold people accountable for inubation activities. Gets

Re: [RT] Multiple Mentors

2003-11-12 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola, I suppose the only slight reservation would be who is accountable? The old Fred Bloggs is looking after that can kick in. I think the Incubator PMC also wants to be able to hold people accountable for inubation activities. Gets harder with multiple people. Does it have to be

Re: Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-28 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Hmmm... policy... guidance... really, I may seem paranoid, but they don't spark a clear distinction in my head. Guideance to me is not a word that I would take to mean that something is a set of rules. It definitely sparks a very clear distinction for me. I want

Re: Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-27 Thread Berin Lautenbach
BTW - Have checked changes in - how do I update the site? Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: My understanding was that there will always be a PMC (or the board) that accepts a candidate on behalf of the ASF. Where there is no Sponsor, the Incubator PMC acts in that role and votes to accept the candidate

Re: Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-27 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: In essence, I agree that we should not change the current meaning of Sponsor, that is exactly what you mean. Ahh - violent agreement :. Absolutely not...for the policy. In the policy document it is only mentioned right at the start as there being a requirement for an

Re: Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-27 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Leo Simons wrote: Hi gang, Okay, okay, I'm exaggerating. Its real cool there's people volunteering to write all this stuff, and the drafts are not *that* formal. I'm just suggesting we make it easy for ourselves and don't try to write perfect and waterproof docs. We just need good enough. back to

Re: Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] Champion (was Sponsor) - the Apache Member (or member of a Sponsoring PMC) who champions a new candidate prior to being accepted by a Sponsor. Who has any idea what this actually means without looking up the definition? Why not call it what it is:

RE: Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remind me, please. With respect to Sponsor, why not just say that the Sponsor is either a Member or a PMC (via the PMC Chair or a Member who is a PMC member)? If a PMC is bringing a project for incubation, it would be the Sponsor. If a Member is

Re: How to manage change in the Incubator rules

2003-10-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Because of this, I would suggest that we remove the draft status on our policy docs and simply use them as our guide, that will change in need without having to go through tedious votes when there is good consensus. Objections? None - although by taking the draft off

Common naming accross policy/process/roles

2003-10-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Peoples, In line with what I have seen in the last couple of weeks on preferred terms I have updated the Policy/Process and Roles and Responsibilities documents so that we have : Champion (was Sponsor) - the Apache Member (or member of a Sponsoring PMC) who champions a new candidate prior to

Re: Proposal: Sponsor becomes Mentor

2003-10-21 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] The name Sponsoring Entity is wierd, and the more I think of it, the more it seems artificial. Yup. It was the best I could think of at the time :. What we need is something that sponsors the project, and will accept it, and someone that

Re: STATUS file compared/contrasted with an issue tracker

2003-10-11 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: BTW, I wrote two mails about it on this list, did you miss them? I mean, are we still having problems with mails? I seem to be getting the odd mail bounced after five days of trying? Cheers, Berin

Re: New proposed incubator CVS layout

2003-10-11 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Here is the layout I am now working on: - build/ (the built site) - site/ (the site docs) - resources/ (forms,project logos,etc) In the root we will have: skinconf.xml (needed for forrest) forrest.properties (needed for forrest) status.xml

Re: STATUS file compared/contrasted with an issue tracker

2003-10-10 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: cycle. If the project chooses to copy the STATUS items into an issue tracker so that they'll receive periodic reminders of outstanding items, that would be their choice, but the only official document would be the STATUS file. Since you want to use XML, if the XML were

Re: Disclaimer text for incubated projects

2003-10-06 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Whoops. There is a line in there : Where capitalised, these terms are to be used as per the definitions found in RFC 2119 (Reference). So I think I was thinking (which is a lot of thinking) the same thing :. Will fix. Fix what? Looks like you already did it. I was

Re: [PROPOSAL] fold incubator-site into incubator CVS ( Re: Posting and tracking project tasks )

2003-10-05 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Since there seems to be agreement that we should have some sort of Mentor reporting to the PMC, it would be easy for Mentors to update the STATUS file at every report. Does this sound reasonable? +1. One is a tool, the other is the processed information. The PMC

Re: Disclaimer text for incubated projects

2003-10-05 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Stephen McConnell wrote: Berin Lautenbach wrote: iproject name is an effort undergoing incubation at the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the name of sponsoring entity. Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates

Re: Disclaimer text for incubated projects

2003-10-04 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Sam Ruby wrote: Can I ask that you document the process of updating the site? Looks like it's already there, but not very obvious. I will add to the side-bar, but in the interim : http://incubator.apache.org/updating_docs.html I want to make sure that there is a set of requirements for what

Auto-update of incubator site

2003-10-04 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Peoples, Is there a cron job anywhere that auto-updates the incubator site out of CVS? http://incubator.apache.org/updating_docs.html doesn't mention one, but at the same time doesn't indicate that you have to log into the site to do a cvs up. If there isn't - does anyone mind if I set up a

Re: Disclaimer text for incubated projects

2003-10-04 Thread Berin Lautenbach
David Jencks wrote: As podlings are not yet fully accepted as part of the Apache Software Foundation, any software releases (including code held in publically available CVS) made by Podlings will not be endorsed by the ASF. Podlings in Incubation SHALL NOT perform any releases of

Mentor vs. Shepherd

2003-10-03 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola and others, I note in the DraftPolicy document you have done a s/shepherd/mentor/g. Is this our final call on the title for these people? I.e. should I make the same change to the Process Description? Cheers, Berin

Re: Disclaimer text for incubated projects

2003-10-03 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Sam Ruby wrote: I'm under the weather, and a little irritable, but this is starting to get under my skin. I am trying to follow http://incubator.apache.org/process.html I have asked for this to be updated. I have asked for information on how I can update this. Sam, I am 90% of the way through

Re: Request for Guidance

2003-10-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Rodent of Unusual Size In particular, I'm going to - put the IncubatorMussings document onto incubator as the overall process description. um, would you mind taking one more poll first before it becomes 'official' policy (since that's what being on the web site means)? i

Re: Re: Request for Guidance

2003-10-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not necessarily. Put it in the website CVS linking it from the drafts section and add a warning part on top so that it's clear that it's a WIP. Sounds like a good compromise. I will do this. However - fair warning - I am going to be a pest and

Re: Request for Guidance

2003-10-02 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] Er, I have way too much experience with wikis to trust them as the source for normative documents -- that's why we use cvs. I'm explaining myself *very* badly today, my apologies. There are two documents I (and others) are currently working on. The

Re: Request for Guidance

2003-10-01 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: my first reaction is: please be patient. people don't function on internet time, and most of us (including you) have other demands on our time. so poke and prod all you like to keep things moving, but don't anticipate instant responses -- or even cogent ones within

Re: Request for Guidance

2003-09-30 Thread Berin Lautenbach
, Berin Roy T. Fielding wrote: The wiki pages would already be committed to cvs if I were not already waiting for you to have access to do it yourself. I'll just assume you won't mind having karma on incubator and add you to avail...Done. Berin Lautenbach and Noel Bergman now have karma

Request for Guidance

2003-09-29 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Incubator PMC People, Would be great to get some guideance and direction on the recent activities that have been occuring. I have a (not trying to be smart) terrible fear that I might be wasting my time, and I *hate* doing that. I'd prefer to be officially told now to re-focus or stop before

Re: The incubator and Poland

2003-09-28 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] So we're yack yacking about the incubator (again). The incubator AFAICT replicated a tricameral vote. To release you must have: 1. A PMC vote to accept it 2. The committers of the project vote that they're ready to leave 3. The incubator PMC vote

Re: Re: incubator, exit and publication

2003-09-28 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Ken, Firstly - apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick. Assumed this was Incubator. (Never assume as the old saying goes.) Had a quick read through. Will be great to have a skeleton in place for PMCs to build on. I wonder if there is a need for two documents? Firstly a board

Re: incubator, exit and publication

2003-09-27 Thread Berin Lautenbach
robert burrell donkin wrote: (sorry stephen i should have probably been clearer.) i was looking for an official(ish) statement from roy or one of the other senior (board level) ASF folks. (i'm happy to take active steps to ensure that ASF policy is enforced by the jakarta pmc - and any other

Re: Re: Exit Criteria

2003-09-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola, Apologies - I've lost the plot a bit on this one :. So what's the final verdict on releases? Cheers, Berin From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Exit Criteria Date: 26/09/2003 16:23:36 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Erik Abele wrote: ... ...but the last part

Re: incubator, exit and publication

2003-09-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Stephen, You will see from my last e-mail that I've lost the plot somewhere, but some thoughts because I can't resist. I was looking at the same thing yesty, but from a slightly different angle. I thought (maybe wrong???) that Incubation was not about how good is this code base/product. If

Re: incubator, exit and publication

2003-09-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Roy, Is the rule below universal accross the ASF? I thought it was up to the PMC of each project on how to handle releases of sub-projects. This has not been codified anywhere for the Incubator. Should I add this into the draft Charter for the PMC? Cheers, Berin From: Roy T. Fielding

Re: incubator, exit and publication

2003-09-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Roy, Please do not take this the wrong way, I'm trying to be constructive :. One of the things that's been driving me up the wall is quite a few people telling me this is the way it must be done because the bylaws say so. But when I go to the bylaws, I get something much more vague - namely

Re: incubator, exit and publication

2003-09-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: This means that, legally speaking, the Incubator can decide to do releases and then remove a project, as also can be done with other projects. Nothing is immutable, again legally speaking. +1 - so releases are permitted (with caveats of course). 2 the incubator votes

Re: [STATUS] (incubator) Wed Sep 24 23:46:04 EDT 2003

2003-09-26 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Stephen McConnell wrote: Any reason why the IncubatorMussings document should not be referended from ApacheIncubatorProjectPages ? It is now. (Ken and Incubator PMC - if that's not OK, feel free to remove) Cheers, Berin

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

2003-09-25 Thread Berin Lautenbach
: On Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:23 AM, Berin Lautenbach wrote: Cliff, Firstly - thanks for all the thoughts. Great stuff! (I think. Grumble grumble, more work, mutter mutter :) You are more than welcome to update anything in the document you so desire. However that's not a hint - am happy

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

2003-09-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Cliff, Firstly - thanks for all the thoughts. Great stuff! (I think. Grumble grumble, more work, mutter mutter :) You are more than welcome to update anything in the document you so desire. However that's not a hint - am happy to (and will tomorrow) take all this on board and make the

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

2003-09-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sometimes a sponsor or a shepherd has to act fast and remove from CVS things that are not correct, like licensing. Or simply to give a hand, always about incubation things. I don't find it inconsistent with meritrocracy, as they should be

Re: Re: Suggestions for Next Steps

2003-09-24 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1. Create a forrest xml source for the Incubation Musings and place onto web site. This will require an OK from who? (PMC?) If you're willing to do the work for this, that's fine, but I don't see a forrest-enabled version as a requirement. At

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
From: Stephen McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think that Berin and I are aiming at the same objective and have very similar motives. I happen to think that we can leverage and utilize the contribution of Berin's process by analysing his concers and underlying interests and drawing from

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Stephen McConnell wrote: Thus you have the shepherd appointed by the sponsor PMC, but being bound by the Incubator PMC rules and regs. (And I would imagine the incubator would need to agree the choice.) Which does not work in practice (with respect to current policy). The Icubator PMC has been

Re: Exit Criteria

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Steven Noels wrote: Do I read you correct in saying that the receiving PMC has no chance anymore to declare an incubation failed, if the Incubator PMC says the contrary? In that case (and I hope I'm wrong), why is the receiving PMC involved then? I've put something slightly different into the

Re: Exit Criteria

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: The sponsoring PMC asks to have that project. This means that it *wants* that project and that community. Why would it change its mind? Maybe there were reservations that the PMC wanted to have covered off during incubation. The best way to ensure that everyone is

3rd update to roles and responsibilities

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Peoples, Have done another update and tried to represent the results of the various comments during the day. Have mainly tried to : 1) Re-emphaise the role of a Sponsor as an ongoing role. No particular requirements in the process (other than initial recommendation), but have stated that

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: An incubation needs someone that actively nutrures the community, pushes the agenda and reports to the PMC of which he is part. I call him the sponsor. We also need someone that is knowlegable of how the Incubator works and that reports to the Incubator PMC. I call

Re: Exit Criteria

2003-09-23 Thread Berin Lautenbach
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: If a project cannot work well with the Sponsor PMC it's a failure, the Incubator will not agree to make it go. It may decide to swith targets, but imposing a project on non-willing PMC is simply out of question. Which may require a vote of the PMC in question to

  1   2   >