Stephen McConnell wrote: > > The incubator has a scope concerning "incubation". I hope the incubator > aims to to provide the role of gatekeeper together with a support > infrasture the accelerate the sucessful exit of incubated projects.
so far so good. > Within the objective and scope, opinions have been put forward > concerning the process of incubation focussed rightly on the subject of > incubation. However - the discussion concerning the publication of > artifacts moves us out of the domain of incubation and into the domain > of managing a incubated project. This is in my opinion a fault - it is > a subject that is the concern of the incubated project - not the incubator. i really don't understand why this is so difficult to understand. perhaps it's because you're coming from the jakarta subproject culture? everything the podling does is most especially the concern of the incubator. until the podling graduates, it is *not* an independent part of the asf or even of another tlp. the incubator has the responsibility of getting the podling to the point at which is can be such -- but until that happens, it is in a grey area. and until it's an approved asf entity, it can't release anything with the asf stamp of 'this is 100% apache software' on it. releases yes, afaic, of course -- but 'this is asf software' releases, no. if the podling graduates, then i see only goodness in relabeling and re-releasing anything that was distributed while it was a podling (as long as there weren't any procedural issues about it at the time of the initial release). -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
