Stephen,
While you say "Ok - going with Apache tradition - its not the PMC that
makes the
decision of a *release*. Its the committers in the incubator (who
basically represent a bunch of rather non-incubator interest groups). "
In fact while that represents the Jakarta tradition I think it is one of
the things that the re-organisation and the incubator were intended to end.
PMC's are now expected, by the board as expressed by Greig, to be formed of
as many commiters as would like to be included.
And PMC's have a duty to be the final arbiter of releases.
Hence one effect of promotion of James, Avalon, Ant etc is to normalise the
situation whereby those projects had de-facto autonomy
in this respect. The same folks are making the same decisions, but are now
officially mandated to do so.
The next symptom is the changes to the Jakarta PMC which have seen it
become inclusive, unlimited in size and recently seriously attempting to
ensure that every sub-project is _properly_ represented, precisely so that
the PMC can make informed decisions on releases and so on, rather than
rubber stamping the decisions of commiters (to be fair it seems to me that
this is a problem caused by Jakarta's sucess, whereby the project grew too
large for enough trust to exist for this responsibility to be delegated,
and for a small PMC to have real oversight of every corner of each
sub-project).
Thirdly the incubator PMC is now (I think?) officially mandated to do this
for the incubator. In the context of this discussion I'd assume that it is
even more important for the decision to be a considered one in the
incubator because of the points raised already about commiters being
possibly less indoctrinated in The Apache Way.
(help I can't make Notes prefix replys with ">" ;-) You also say:
"Perhaps you can explain to me how the action of the Incuator PMC with
respect to publication of an artifact and its reciprical impications
towards the liability of the ASF is something that can be held up with
*integrity* while at the same time, the Incubator PMC has not
facilitated the exit of said podling. If a podling has not exited -
then it clearly has not met Incuabtor exit criteria - then equally
clearly, the Board has not established due-diligence, therfore - on what
grounds can a release be published?"
Surely the incubator PMC is primarily responsible, in the context of a
release, only for ensuring the legality and desirability of the release?
I don't see linkage between this and exit, if a podling has not met exit
criteria owing to factors such as process and community the contributors
may still be able to make a case for releasing an artifact, it then surely
falls to the incubator PMC to decide based on things like IP ownership and
other legal matters. If the podling is incapable of preparing the release
acceptably then the incubator has more work to do, if not then it doesn't
follow that the podling is ready for exit, there may be unrelated issues to
resolve.
You also imply that the incubator PMC have the opportunity to unreasonably
resist or obstruct exit yet still permit releases, were this to occur it
would be serious, but we do have to rely primarily on the judgement of the
PMC, thats the whole point of the incubator.
Where we believe this judgement has failed surely our (non PMC "interested
bloke") course of action is clear? We fall back on precedence, notifying
higher authority (the board), proposals, votes, and heated debate,
collectively known as The Apache Way.
d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***************************************************************************
The information in this e-mail is confidential and for use by the addressee(s) only.
If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible for delivery of the message to
the intended recipient) please notify us immediately on 0141 306 2050 and delete the
message from your computer. You may not copy or forward it or use or disclose its
contents to any other person. As Internet communications are capable of data
corruption Student Loans Company Limited does not accept any responsibility for
changes made to this message after it was sent. For this reason it may be
inappropriate to rely on advice or opinions contained in an e-mail without obtaining
written confirmation of it. Neither Student Loans Company Limited or the sender
accepts any liability or responsibility for viruses as it is your responsibility to
scan attachments (if any). Opinions and views expressed in this e-mail are those of
the sender and may not reflect the opinions and views of The Student Loans Company
Limited.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of
computer viruses.
**************************************************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
