Keep your FUD to yourself -- it is not welcome here. Especially when you have no facts. -g
I think this is beeing rushed, and the process looks diferent then the process for Tapestry into incubator for example, where there was a public vote; and I think Incubator had a process documemented someplace.
i think that there are a few differences (that should be noted for the record):
1. tapestry applied for entry to jakarta. there is a very high barrier which projects who wish to become part of jakarta have to pass. (if i understand correctly) geronimo is a board level initiative which will become a top level project.
2. tapestry lacked active support from apache members.
3. tapestry was the first.
FWIW i think that tapestry has become a stronger projects due to this baptism of fire. i also think that it's unfortunately that the incubation took so much energy that could probably have been more effectively spent elsewhere.
i do agree that the incubation process needs to be improved and documented.
i also feel that it's important that all incubatees follow the same process (even though for some products this may just be a formality).
- robert
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
