On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > There is no reason for a project to have a final destination until > it has to go somewhere other than incubator, at which point it can > decide whether it wants to be a TLP (calling for a board vote) or > part of an existing project (calling for that project's pmc to vote).
The language and policy regarding sponsors in <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html> and others, while not directly contradicting that statement, certainly seems to encourage the opposite. If the intention is to generally decide at the point of graduation whether a project is a TLP or a part of an exsiting project rather than at the time of initiation, then I think the language of policy/guidelines should be revised. The current language regarding sponsors makes it sound like "lazy destination selection" is the exception rather than the rule. > Maybe we should have a six month limit on incubation, where the > result is promote or punt. > > We have no way to measure the worthiness of a project before it has > even started, and generally speaking we are MUCH MUCH MUCH better off > if a project gets started in Apache rather than on sourceforge. > > I don't care if there is some overlap with Wagon, nor do I care for > any further discussion about which one is better -- if I can't find > some objective criteria for evaluating software, then I obviously > don't need that software. Once I need it, I can figure out for myself > which one is better -- I don't need someone to assume that for me. > It is easier for Apache to support both projects than to arbitrarily > choose between the two. > > ....Roy > -- - Rod <http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
