I was going to ask the same. I've seen ~5 proposals now, and was surprised to see how they all copied and pasted the same boilerplate to answer several points, including this stanza about risk of excessive fascination with the brand.
I also suspect that there is excessive fascination, and that paying lip service to it as a risk is not really sufficient. That may be another discussion. But concretely: what about just asking proposers to not copy and paste past proposals? Surely it's not so much to ask the proposed project to address, individually and from scratch, the issues raised by the proposal process. Or, explicitly ask the proposal to address why the project should be part of the ASF, now -- that is, what *else* besides becoming "Apache Foo" is the motivation? On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > I was wondering... What we *REALLY* want are projects > that are interested more in The Apache Way than in the > Apache Brand. We need to make it more clear, somehow, > that new projects want to enter the ASF because they > approve of, and want to follow, the *how* of creating > projects and communities. Lately, it appears, that we > have graduated projects which are more interested in > simply being able to add 'Apache' to their name, and > then deride/minimize/ignore/dispute most/all of the > aspects of The Apache Way which is what made the Apache > brand so valuable and noteworthy. > > Maybe we need to change the proposal guide. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
