I have to agree. AFAICT, accepting subprojects in the raison d'etre of the
Incubator. I was surprised by the statement that the incubator does not want
subprojects. IIRC, the board has said that all subprojects must come through
the incubator. If it's just a cork, what's the point of it?
No, accepting the donation of new code has to come though incubator. Unfortunately, the incubator PMC currently consists of the same people who have over-volunteered their time for all of the other projects that aren't getting done in the ASF. Furthermore, there are no project guidelines for incubator that say who gets to vote and what we might be voting about, let alone how we track requests for infrastructure.
Does anyone want to volunteer for those tasks? Or just do them? I'll be happy to give you whatever commit access is needed.
What I see is Tapestry asking incubator to do things that only infrastructure can accomplish (because we don't have the user privs) and complaining here. Sorry dudes, but I tune out people who start their message by pissing and moaning about the behavior of those people from whom they wish a favor. We are all volunteers.
Yes, the documentation is insufficient. Sorry, someone made the mistake of introducing an entry-barrier on the docs, which means it will be a while before anyone other than Ken or Nicola Ken will get around to editing the documentation directly. Most of the decisions on incubator are on hold pending other site-wide or community-wide or board issues that soak up 110% of everyone's time.
Who is the RM for incubation of Tapestry? We have a STATUS file:
incubator/projects/tapestry/STATUS
I see no evidence of any progress of Tapestry towards fulfilling the
conditions on incubation. Does that mean the STATUS file needs updating?
Please let me know who should have commit access to it.
....Roy
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
