On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > This has been the subject of prior conversations, but I'm opening a > thread in some hope of reaching a definitive resolution. > Some of our non-graduating podlings have a common problem. They look > good in all ways except growth. This inhibits graduation from 2.5 > standpoints: > 1) they are dubiously large enough to sustain as a TLP. > 2) they don't have much (or any) track record in incorporating new > contributors. > 2.5) they might not be very diverse. I list this as a .5 because I > think that we've established that diversity is a lower priority. > There are some possible responses to this situation. > a) toss them out of the incubator. > b) keep them in the incubator indefinitely. > c) graduate them, but with some conditions.
Should smaller incubator projects be encouraged to graduate as sub-projects of existing projects or is that not an option anymore? Specifically, I was thinking about Amber, which might just work as a sub-project of Apache Shiro if they are too small to make it on their own. However, we (the Shiro PMC) haven't suggested this to them and they haven't contacted us. Since Jakarta, my understanding is that the incubator would rather see the projects graduating as TLPs, not sub-projects, is that correct? Kalle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
