On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Simon Phipps wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:17 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:06 AM, <robert_w...@us.ibm.com> wrote: >>> >>>>> I would recommend altering the proposal. "We have the set of files >>>>> specified in the software grant. During incubation, we will seek a >>>>> grant to the following groups of code: <bullet list>" >>>> >>>> >>>> Done. >>>> >>> >>> Beat me to it :-) We still need to get that list fleshed out though, so >> it >>> probably out to have its own wiki page somewhere, no? >> >> Simon, just a procedural pointL it's not quite kosher for just anyone >> to change an ASF podling proposal. In general, the sponsor, champion >> and initial submitters have that authority (after all, it is *their* >> proposal). People are encouraged to add themselves as contributors, >> of course, but substantial changes to the actual proposal are not, >> in general, accepted. >> >> Sorry Jim - I actually asked Sam and others about this earlier[1] and he > told me to go right ahead[2][3]. Clearly I was right to be reticent[1] and > I'll be sure not to consider it again. >
If there is something discussed on the list and there is agreement/ consensus that it makes sense (by the people "behind" and "responsible" for the proposal), then if they say "go ahead" then it's no problem: the proposal is being adjusted in a way they approve of and are aware of. My point was, as mentioned, just a procedural one: in general modifications of ASF podling proposals are not open-ended nor changable by just anyone. Cheers! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
