On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 6, 2012, at 09:41 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > ...It seems to me that the concept of 'project sponsorship' of podlings >> > is left over from the days of umbrellas -- a podling sponsored by an >> > umbrella would graduate as a subproject of the umbrella. >> > >> > If this logic is correct, then it would seem that project sponsorship >> > is no longer relevant, and we could remove it from documentation.... >> >> All the podlings that I've been mentoring have been sponsored by the >> Incubator IIRC, so I tend to agree. > > Typically where a project graduates to is a graduation time decision, > not an incubator entry decision, so it seems reasonable that the > incubator sponsors a project until the right destination is agreed, even > if the destination may seem obvious when incubation begins.
Look at it as giving an *engagement ring* without the commitment (yet) of marriage. I think it has value that theres an intention to work together and start the process towards a single community. It may not work out that way - and thats OK - but if it does go well and the podling joins an existing TLP then I'm sure starting out this way (i.e. being sponsored) can be a positive part of helping it get there. So my 2 cents would be to make it optional - keep it where theres a synergy and interest from a real project. Where it doesn't really mean anything is when the incubator PMC is the sponsor and IMO we may as well drop that. Niall > Upayavira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
