On 12/29/05, Greg Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If another PMC decides a project should be incubated, they must
> provide the people to make that happen (so we achieve proper scaling
> and to put the effort on those who want the results). The Incubator
> can't refuse the project outright, but if the STATUS page or
> proposal/charter or whatever doesn't meet the guidelines, then the
> Incubator can certainly require that it be amended. But you should not
> simply be able to kill it outright.
+1. I think that's an important distinction to make.
Proposals should require the "advice and consent" of the Incubator
PMC. I agree that while the Incubator PMC shouldn't be able to kill
the project, they can and should be able to say "Your charter sucks.
Rewrite it. We won't sign off until that happens."
It's about the form than the content. Roy's comments about Tuscany
proposal are what I'd characterize in this mold. The Incubator PMC
should also be able to make a judgment ("certification"?) of the
process proposed by the PMC - such as whether a code base should be
under full incubation or just use the IP clearance form.
I think that making it clear that the Incubator PMC can do this would
go a long way to addressing some of the concerns already mentioned.
-- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
