Cliff Schmidt wrote on Monday, May 17, 2004 7:30 PM: > Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, May 17, 2004 6:10 PM: <snip/> >>> Since the project is being proposed as a TLP with three subprojects, >>> I've requested that the Board consider this proposal at their next >>> meeting. However, it is my understanding that the proposal should >>> first be voted on by the Incubator PMC. >> >> As I understand it, there is no real need for the Board to consider >> it until there is a proposal at the end of Incubation for it to >> become a TLP. In the meantime, it is the Incubator's responsibility. > > That's fine with me, but it seems slightly different from my > understanding of the outcome of some of the lengthy incubator > discussions we had towards the end of the year. I'll start another > thread on this, because it's not significant for this proposal, but > I do think we should make sure all our docs are saying the right > thing.
I've listed a bunch of history and current docs below, but I'll start with my view of the right way to do this: I really like the PPMC concept. To get the most out of a PPMC, I think the Podling should, if at all possible, know what TLP it is destined for or if it is expected to become a TLP itself. I think this will help with composing the PPMC with the right people, as well as knowing which project's charter would make sense to follow...or if the project should start working on its own charter (rather than waiting until exiting incubation). Therefore, I suggest that we treat potential TLPs the same as all other projects with one exception: the Board still needs to vote for the TLP resolution upon exiting incubation; but that should be a technicality if all goes well. Like other projects, potential TLPs could either start with a Sponsor or use the Incubator as a temporary Sponsor (especially since waiting for the Board to agree to sponsor means getting tied to a monthly meeting schedule). However, shortly after entering Incubation, I think it is best if a TLP has gotten the Board to agree that it approves of the project as a TLP and expects to vote for an applicable resolution upon successful incubation. ------------------------- and now, for anyone interested in what our docs currently state: See the first two paragraphs in Acceptance (to becoming a Podling) section of the Process doc: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Process_Description.html#Acceptance and the Proposal section of the Policy document: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Proposal%0A and from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Sponsor: "A Sponsor will be one of: - The Board of the Apache Software Foundation. In this case, it is expected that the candidate would become a TLP on successful completion of Incubation." According to http://incubator.apache.org/projects/index.html#Currently+Incubating, Geronimo and SpamAssassin are sponsored by the "Incubator PMC for the Board", but AltRMI and Directory do not yet have intended homes. (unless I'm misinterpreting something here) Finally, here are a couple relevant posts on this topic from last September: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=2051 http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=2052 I guess the question is whether TLPs projects should be voted on by their Sponsor{ing Entity} *before* entering Incubator (as I think is typical for non-TLPs), or *after* satisfying their Incubator exit criteria and a vote of the Incubator PMC, or possibly *before and after*? Cliff --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
