Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> If a company isn't willing to put the code base out themselves under
> their own ownership, but would rather it be (C) ASF, that leads me to
> wonder about what liability the company is attempting to avoid by doing
> so. It may be paranoia, but seeing a company willing to
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
java.apache.org history shows a long history of failures in incubating
projects without code. jakarta doesn't, exactly because we established
that rule.
It would be a *major* step back if we lifted that requirement.
We wouldn't be lifting it because we haven't ha
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
why? if the idea excites people but the code sucks, are we going to
turn it down?
In that case, we might decide to accept a new project into the
incuba
On Jul 12, 2004, at 5:39 PM, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
why? if the idea excites people but the code sucks, are we going to
turn it down?
In that case, we might decide to accept a
> java.apache.org history shows a long history of failures in incubating
> projects without code. jakarta doesn't, exactly because we established
> that rule.
> It would be a *major* step back if we lifted that requirement.
We wouldn't be lifting it because we haven't had that requirement. In th
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
why? if the idea excites people but the code sucks, are we going to
turn it down?
In that case, we might decide to accept a new project into the incubator
for the same purpose,
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
As I see it, community is our concern. Either we have a strong community
coming in, or we believe that we have the ability to form one around some
catalyst.
If we are accepting a contribution based upon its community, the quality of
its code is probably not a pre-determining
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
It seems to me that any honest assessment of the merit of
accepting a proposal should include a look at the code itself, if
only to
get a gut-check on how maintainable and evolveable that codebase
m
As I see it, community is our concern. Either we have a strong community
coming in, or we believe that we have the ability to form one around some
catalyst.
If we are accepting a contribution based upon its community, the quality of
its code is probably not a pre-determining criteria, and we woul
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
It seems to me that any honest assessment of the merit of
accepting a proposal should include a look at the code itself, if only to
get a gut-check on how maintainable and evolveable that codebase might be
going forward.
why
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
In walking through the incubation documents (helping a couple of groups
who have asked me about how to do this) it struck me that there was no
requirement that the proposal provide a link to download and evaluate
the code around which a project is being proposed - in fact
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
It seems to me that any honest assessment of the merit of
accepting a proposal should include a look at the code itself, if only to
get a gut-check on how maintainable and evolveable that codebase might be
goin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> It seems to me that any honest assessment of the merit of
> accepting a proposal should include a look at the code itself, if only to
> get a gut-check on how maintainable and evolveable that codebase might be
> going forward.
why? if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>
> Given that there are many places where one can start an open source
> project, IMO it makes perfect sense for Apache to have a higher
> standard. If the company's strategy question is whether to open source
> or not, then if the dec
"Andreas Hartmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Another thought:
>
> What if a company considers to introduce an open source strategy,
> but the decision depends on whether the code is accepted as an
> Apache project or not? I think they will avoid showing the code
> before the project is accepte
Brian Behlendorf wrote on Thursday, July 08, 2004 6:35 PM:
> In walking through the incubation documents (helping a couple of
> groups who have asked me about how to do this) it struck me that
> there was no requirement that the proposal provide a link to download
> and evaluate the code around wh
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
In walking through the incubation documents (helping a couple of
groups who have asked me about how to do this) it struck me that there
was no requirement that the proposal provide a link to download and
evaluate the code around which a project is
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
In walking through the incubation documents (helping a couple of groups
who have asked me about how to do this) it struck me that there was no
requirement that the proposal provide a link to download and evaluate
the code around which a project is being proposed - in fact
In walking through the incubation documents (helping a couple of groups
who have asked me about how to do this) it struck me that there was no
requirement that the proposal provide a link to download and evaluate the
code around which a project is being proposed - in fact it appears the
code it
19 matches
Mail list logo
