The usual way -- people wanting it to happen will make it happen. If people
don't want it to happen, it won't happen. However, let me make this
perfectly clear: anyone who thinks non-action on the part of incubator
will result in this process being handed back to the PMCs is smoking
some very bad dope. The default will be to not accept the project.
If you want to improve incubation, then you will have to improve
the incubator, and the only way to do that is by volunteering.
The incubator is good because it provides a great benefit to the ASF and there is no other way because the incubator is good and it provides a great benefit to the ASF and there is no other way. Got > it.
That's infantile. "incubator" is a project. It should be obvious that if
nobody works on the project, the task it was set out to accomplish won't
be accomplished. You can either continue pissing and moaning about lack
of progress or you can choose to make progress. Either way, it will still
be called "incubator" when you are done, and it will still have sole
responsibility for accepting new code.
You were supposed to be the incubator.
Wow in the long winded conversations going into this I was an irrelevant cog interrupting the grand incubator scheme.. Now I'm the incubator?
When was the last time you encountered an Apache project that was actually wind-powered?
So if the purpose of the PMC is to what?
The PMC exists for the same reason other projects have PMCs -- to make sure that committers get commit privs, to approve the guidelines when they are documented, and to identify those people who have been given the authority to make decisions on behalf of the ASF within its scope. The PMC is supposed to be the people doing the work.
It has done none of those things. Sam did the first, I did the third with regards to tapestry.
I know that.
Dion, myself and the tapestry committers did all the work with Tapestry. So if thats the program congrats it worked...just don't know what good the icubator did for it.
You are the incubator. What do you think?
Every response I tried to give resolved to "God so loved the world that he didn't send a committee"... and I'm not even a creationist.
Hey, if I wanted a parable ...
I think I'll just spell out the sponsoring member's duties and who/what has is the real process. I will volunteer to document it. I'll forward the wiki page once I get it started.
Don't cry to me about ignored bits if you can't bother to use CVS.
I still think a set of "here is what the goals are" "this means it succeeded" "this means we need to change our minds"
That sounds like a good start.
....Roy
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
