One more thing: We've got three mentors. If anyone else would like to volunteer we won't say no :)
I've used the E-Mail addresses from your mails in the proposal. Feel free to update to an @apache.org address if you want to. On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:05 AM Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks to the three of you. > > Those arguments make sense to me and we indeed have a few "newcomers" with > us (that includes me in a non-committer role) so I've changed my opinion > and think the Incubator way would be the best. > > I'll edit the Wiki proposal (and add Christofer whom I've forgotten, > sorry!) to indicate this. > > If there are no other comments or concerns about anything we've written in > the proposal I would "close" this discussion soon and start a vote early > next week. > > Cheers, > Lars > > (as a heads up: I might be slow to respond next week due to limited > connectivity but we're in no rush as far as I'm concerned) > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:53 AM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote: > >> My initial thought was: this should go straight to TLP: Training should be >> done by people who know what they're training about: whether it be the >> Apache Way or a specific project. All the committers will likely be >> people >> who've at least reached committer status in a project, and most of them >> will probably be ASF members. >> >> But then I thought again: developing effective materials will require >> contact to the users of those materials. What better place to find people >> to QA training materials and approaches than in the incubator? I think a >> training project would benefit from incubator participation in a different >> manner than most projects do, but I do think starting in the incubator >> (and >> possibly, after discussion, even staying there) might be a good approach >> for this project. >> >> Best Regards, >> Myrle >> >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:34 AM Sönke Liebau >> <soenke.lie...@opencore.com.invalid> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > after spending some time thinking about this I also tend towards the >> > Incubator route as I am sure this will help build and grow an active >> > community and processes. >> > >> > Best regards, >> > Sönke >> > >> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 6:38 AM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > > discussion seems to have died down. Before moving on I'd really >> like to >> > > > hear the opinions of the interested contributors on which direction >> to >> > go. >> > > > Otherwise we might have to put it to a vote? >> > > >> > > Perhaps I biased, but I think going via the incubator is alway >> helpful. >> > :-) The big question is would the board support the project going >> straight >> > to TLP? I really don’t know, it’s approved them in the past and not >> > rejected any that I know of. What could the project do to show the board >> > that going straight to TLP is justifiable? Perhaps start by list out how >> > many ASF members you have on the project and and give an idea of how >> long >> > they been around, how many projects they gone through incubation with >> and >> > how active they are in the incubator and may help you decide which path >> to >> > go and give the board some reassurance. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Justin >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Sönke Liebau >> > Partner >> > Tel. +49 179 7940878 >> > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > >> > >> >
