On Tue 11 Aug 2009 04:06, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > There are two reasons why it is more heavyweight: because we haven't > spent huge amounts of time/money automating our infrastructure and > putting it behind a pretty web UI, but more importantly because we pay > more attention to the legals, ensuring we have grants, CLAs etc, and > that we know precicely what piece of code came from where.
The infrastructure costs shouldn't dictate policy though. Not to put any more stress on infra, but in an ideal setting, infra wouldn't be an issue. The paperwork is an important feature, but the paperwork also doesn't require an existing codebase. If a group of people want to start a new incubator project and we have sufficient suitable mentors and champions, then I say go for it. Certainly a project without any code deserves a bit more scrutiny, such as "have the proposed committers worked on open source previously?" but again, I think that's a case by case decision. -- J. Aaron Farr 馮傑仁 www.cubiclemuses.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
