Yeah - coming from the point of view of a project working on entering
the incubator, I'd rather have tough IP restrictions on entering the
incubator, but once I'm in the incubator have an environment that most
effectively promotes growth and adoption of the project. Rather than
feeling like we are taking a step backwards in adoption by joining the
incubator.
Currently JSecurity has a community, is published to Maven, and does
regular releases. If joining the incubator meant that we were no
longer approved to do releases to our community, that seems like a
hindrance to adoption. If people can no longer download releases via
Maven without going through annoying steps that make it seem immature
and unreliable, then that's a hindrance to adoption.
I'd much rather have a strict process up front that get it IP
clearance and then make it easy for people to adopt, than to enter the
incubation process and have hindrances put in place.
Perhaps one idea is to not treat all projects or incubation proposals
the same. Some projects could choose to enter the incubator now, have
access to Apache's infrastructure, etc. and gain IP clearance at some
later date where they can then do releases. Other more established
projects could choose to front-load the IP clearance and have that
occur before they are even accepted. In those cases, once they are
accepted, they can immediately continue to do releases and foster the
community growth.
Just throwing out my 2 cents...
On May 30, 2008, at 11:43 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
Hrm - I thought you had to have IP clearance before you even were
accepted as a podling. Or maybe its just that Alan is such a great
Champion for us, that he helped us along that path before we even
submitted our proposal ;)
Under this assumption (that IP clearance exists already), it makes
much more sense to allow the podling to publish approved releases to
the central repository, but still under an
org.apache.incubator.projectname group id to maintain
convention/simplicity.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:38 AM, James Carman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
So it seems that a valid question is whether or not publishing to
one
repository or another indicates an endorsement.
Yes, that's certainly a valid question. Again, that's just my
personal point of view.
The biggest problem with incubator projects (again my opinion) having
releases is the IP clearance. Perhaps there should be multiple
stages
of incubation. The first stage should be where you verify the IP
clearance and projects in that stage shouldn't be allowed to do
releases at all. Then they might graduate to the next stage and that
would be a "community building" stage where we make sure the project
has enough community around it. These projects should be able to
provide incubating releases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
