Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Jan 7, 2006, at 8:15 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Final Results of incubation vote;
Votes +1; wrowe, mads, jerenkrantz, jimjag, geirm
Votes -1; [none]
As such the project is accepted for incubation.
The proposal was never added to the wiki.
Correct, I've never added a project to the wiki prior to a vote for adoption.
It's never been pointed out to me before either <shrug>, and was the reason to
create the ppmc discussion list to drive 'filling in the blanks'.
[more on this below]
> AFAICT, the proposal consists
of two committers and the product is named after their company.
Actually five original committers are mentioned, three of which are still
in the process of returning their CLA's. It also consists of a number of
individuals (mostly admin-type folks with some development background) who
expressed interest in contributing to the project, to Neil at AC San Diego.
Dunno if those individuals should be considered now, or wait until they
post the appropriate number of patches to merit project membership <shrug>.
As far as the name, you and I came to different conclusions, I've pinged
the list w.r.t. that question.
The SourceForge site consists of nothing but a whitepaper without any
meaningful content -- just a set of goals and a list of results.
This is a complete framework; invitations to view it in operation on
living, breathing infrastructure were made a day in advance, at ApacheCon,
and there were about 4 others in attendance (sorry I didn't make a sign in
sheet to record whom) as well as a few ASF members including Mads and I.
I agree and addressed your question about source code review in another thread.
The proposal was voted +1 by four of the most over-committed members of
the ASF. The mentors are already mentoring other podlings. Mads offered
to mentor as well, which seems to have been lost in the process.
Howso? He offered in a subsequent thread, and is listed as ppmc moderator
in the Jira -ppmc list request form. In fact we would even appreciate another
ASF member at any time who offered to step up and help co-mentor. And I've
asked in another thread if Jim's original offer still stands, the project
would certainly correspond to his long history in server administration.
[That said, I view any ASF member participating on any incubator project as yet
another mentor.]
How did you guys come to the conclusion that this belongs at Apache?
Speaking for myself alone...
One very common theme in administering ASF software is 'how come there
is no ASF project to administer this thing?' There are a couple of exceptions
to this theme, the Tomcat Management applet being one example.
This project already plugs into httpd and Tomcat, so it already breaks the
threshold of 'just another X project management tool', and has been presented
as an extensible framework. I know from conversations at AC that the developers
envision other ASF projects choosing (or not) to plug into this framework, to
manage additional technologies.
Are you prepared for the commitment required to incubate a group
that has zero Apache experience?
Yup. They've been using Apache for years, so understand the 'concept' from
the inception of this idea (long before I heard of it.) Obviously that does
not translate 1:1 into understanding participation, so there is work to be
done. That's an incremental task, not a 'lay it all down at once' sort of
chore. If it were that easy, we wouldn't need mentors, we'd just RTFM them.
How many new proposers hang on on infra for a couple months, soaking in the
process, and then drop into our Hackathon space to say hello and address folks
face-to-face? 'zero' is most definately an exageration.
Is this going to be another stdcxx, where the mentors failed to handle
the basic incubation tasks?
[snipped reply]
Feel free to post a thread under either general@ or stdcxx-pmc@ forums, and
we would be happy to discuss each and every concern you have with the progress,
or lack thereof, in stdcxx. This troll doesn't merit further comment on this
thread of TMCg2. As an argument w.r.t. the proposal on hand, null cross
references to stdcxx are off base.
I certainly don't remember any STDCXX complaints from you, previously. More
mentors and oversite to that podling are always welcome, and glad to have you
aboard, if you care to help.
I don't see it. If you think this is under incubation, then you need
to start by creating a status page that reflects the actual resources
being requested and by whom. After that, I suggest you find out the
actual list of committers.
*That* is fair. I'm happy to create the wiki page now, list out the
(initial) resources we are creating or requesting, list out the initial
participants, and move forward from there. That's a good standard
operating procedure. Waiting on feedback, and I'm sure you are too, to
my questions just posted this evening.
Welcome to the discussion w.r.t. TMCg2; we would have loved to have these
concerns expressed a month ago, but I'm sure Neil and Steve are happy to
address them then or now.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
