> We have not voted on any definitive resolution about this, but currently
> there is an informal rule sprung out of necessity that each incubating
> project should have someone from Apache that sponsors and actively works
> with the project, and a shepherd from the PMC that oversees and reports
> back to the PMC.
> The incubator shepherd is someone that has already seen incubating
> projects and gives advise based on Incubator experience, and is the
> legal bind to the PMC.
> The sponsor instead is a more active figure that pushes forward the
> issues and solves them. He usually does not usually incubate projects,
> and thus refers to the shepherd for extra guidance, and will probably
> not incubate other projects. We can say that this person is the one that
> is doing th eactual community incubation.
Fair enough. I see the point you are making. Hopefully the Sponsor does
the lion's share of the incubation, because the Shepherd is likely to have
to watch over multiple projects. Also, what you propose is a process that
should help to transfer incubation expertise (as it develops) so that more
Shepherds can be bred to the process.
> This makes the incubator into a place where the sponsor can incubate
> projects, as it was before, but there is a PMC that can oversee the
> process and can ensure that some rules that the Apache must see applied
> are done.
I think that would happen with either approach. Your variation brings a
personal PMC contact into the picture, rather than the Sponsor acting as
Shepherd, and working with the PMC as a whole. I don't think that it scales
without growing the PMC, but the process will help to create more
experienced Shepherds, and that will enable the process to scale over time.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
