I think I get what you mean! :-)
10 PRINT "There are no subprojects"
20 GOTO 10
So in the case of Lenya, we should not have done community incubation,
as the project would have been part of the Cocoon project, so it's
Cocoon's thing to do.
This means that Lenya falls under the same case as Wa
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
Lenya will become a sub-project of Cocoon. Or better, a sub-codebase
of the same project. It's fair to assume that once incubation is
finished, the Lenya codebase will go to the Cocoon PMC and that all
Lenya committers wi
Stitching the parts I find important to concentrate on.
(Sam, you can reply to my questions here for brevity and clarity)
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
...
Hmmm ... I am beginning to wonder about the semantic gap. For a new
"sub-project", e.g., a Lenya under Cocoon, we both agree that the Incubator
is re
Sam Ruby wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
Lenya will become a sub-project of Cocoon. Or better, a sub-codebase
of the same project. It's fair to assume that once incubation is
finished, the Lenya codebase will go to the Cocoon PMC and that all
Lenya committers will go in the Cocoon PMC.
Now
Nicola Ken wrote:
> Lenya will become a sub-project of Cocoon. Or better, a sub-codebase of
> the same project. It's fair to assume that once incubation is finished,
> the Lenya codebase will go to the Cocoon PMC and that all Lenya
> committers will go in the Cocoon PMC.
> Now, IIUC you suggest th
Sam Ruby wrote:
> I, in turn, think that some have interpreted the Incubator's
> mandate too broadly.
Then lets get the mandate clarified and/or our shared understanding of it.
:-)
> No question on having the incubator "vette" the clear title. I actively
> support that role for the incubator on
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
I maintain that if I were made an active committer in Maven by virtue
of this hypothetical donation (and therefore eligable to become a
member of the Maven PMC, perhaps immediately or perhaps after a few
month delay), that no PPMC would be neccessary or appropriate.
I
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
...
My first guess is that we should simply set up a page for code grants as
we do for incubating projects, and a directory to store the grant stuff.
PMC chairs would simply track the status of the donation there.
I don't believe that we need a special case of this situation.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
I've put it this way on the wiki proposal, it should suffice:
"Incubator PMC members not engaged in active discussion and development
on a project are on the project PPMC in quality of observers. They
should refrain from voting on PPMC decisions unless really necessary,
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Suppose somebody new contributes 1K lines of quality code a week to
Maven over the course of a year... and is voted in as a comitter.
Clearly a CLA is required, but does a PPMC need to be created or
does the incubator need to be involved?
Of course not, as yo
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > 2) Suppose I write 50K lines of code and it lives on sourceforge for a
> > year. Maven takes a liking to it and I contribute it (and in the
> > process am made a committer). Clearly a software grant is required, but
> > is a PPMC needed or does the incubator need to
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Suppose somebody new contributes 1K lines of quality code a week to
> Maven over the course of a year... and is voted in as a comitter.
> Clearly a CLA is required, but does a PPMC need to be created or
> does the incubator need to be involved?
Of course not, as you well know.
Sam Ruby wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
2) Suppose I write 50K lines of code and it lives on sourceforge for
a year. Maven takes a liking to it and I contribute it (and in the
process am made a committer). Clearly a software grant is required,
but is a PPMC needed or does the incubator nee
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
2) Suppose I write 50K lines of code and it lives on sourceforge for a
year. Maven takes a liking to it and I contribute it (and in the
process am made a committer). Clearly a software grant is required,
but is a PPMC needed or does the incubator need to be involved?
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
I've put it this way on the wiki proposal, it should suffice:
"Incubator PMC members not engaged in active discussion and development
on a project are on the project PPMC in quality of observers. They
should refrain from voting on PPMC decisions unless really necessary
Sam Ruby wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
One thing we have talked about is PPMC's. This makes a lot of sense for
things proposed as new ASF projects. This makes considerably less sense
for donations such as the ones that are coming into Maven. The PMC is
already established.
Sam Ruby wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
...
For that reason, I believe that there needs to be a clear distinction
between PPMC members who are primarily observers and vetoers of last
resort, and those who are active in the construction of the project.
Is it really needed? I gues
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
One thing we have talked about is PPMC's. This makes a lot of sense for
things proposed as new ASF projects. This makes considerably less sense
for donations such as the ones that are coming into Maven. The PMC is
already established. New committers ma
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Thanks for bringing up this question.
Thanks Sam for this very nice mail, I agree with what you say.
I have just one point:
...
For that reason, I believe that there needs to be a clear distinction
between PPMC members who are primarily observers and
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:03:31PM +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> I'm getting annoyed by the high number of mails I write that get cced to
> members. If members want to participate in the Incubator, there is a
> mailing list, so please cut it off.
I agree completely. Can we please stop pollu
Sam Ruby wrote:
> One thing we have talked about is PPMC's. This makes a lot of sense for
> things proposed as new ASF projects. This makes considerably less sense
> for donations such as the ones that are coming into Maven. The PMC is
> already established. New committers may come online as
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
On 12/2/03 8:04 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
How is it to be done?
Ditch the incubator bureaucracy entirely and have the sponsoring member go
into the community, show them the light and then demonstrate to the PMC or
governan
Sam Ruby wrote:
Thanks for bringing up this question.
Thanks Sam for this very nice mail, I agree with what you say.
I have just one point:
...
For that reason, I believe that there needs to be a clear distinction
between PPMC members who are primarily observers and vetoers of last
resort, and
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
...
That's my current strawman. Work for you?
Excellent, it surely does :-)
I put the things said in these mails here:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PpmcProposal
and linked it from here:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator
With this new wiki all diffs are sent to [EMAIL P
Thanks for bringing up this question.
First and foremost, the incubator's focus should be on legal aspects.
Do we have all the necessary rights to the code base? Do all committers
have the necessary CLA's signed.
I am getting nearly daily calls from IBM lawyers asking about one code
base or a
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > >Who should be on each ppmc?
> > > - all PMC members of the future PMC (committers + landing PMC
members)
> > > - all Incubator PMC members (or just mentors?)
> >
> > AIUI, yes. All of the above.
> So the Mentors would be the only ones that
On 12/2/03 8:04 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>>> How is it to be done?
>>
>> Ditch the incubator bureaucracy entirely and have the sponsoring member go
>> into the community, show them the light and then demonstrate to the PMC or
>> governance b
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Ditch the incubator bureaucracy entirely and have the sponsoring member go
> into the community, show them the light and then demonstrate to the PMC or
> governance body (board/members whatever) that the project has a strong
> community and follows the rules and audits the
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Who should be on each ppmc?
- all PMC members of the future PMC (committers + landing PMC members)
- all Incubator PMC members (or just mentors?)
AIUI, yes. All of the above.
So the Mentors would be the only ones that must stay also on the other
project mailing lists, co
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
How is it to be done?
Ditch the incubator bureaucracy entirely and have the sponsoring member go
into the community, show them the light and then demonstrate to the PMC or
governance body (board/members whatever) that the project has a strong
community and follows the rules
I'm getting annoyed by the high number of mails I write that get cced to
members. If members want to participate in the Incubator, there is a
mailing list, so please cut it off.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions
> Who should be on each ppmc?
> - all PMC members of the future PMC (committers + landing PMC members)
> - all Incubator PMC members (or just mentors?)
AIUI, yes. All of the above.
> 5) Reporting the the main Incubator PMC
Non-issue (see above).
--- Noel
--
> How is it to be done?
>
Ditch the incubator bureaucracy entirely and have the sponsoring member go
into the community, show them the light and then demonstrate to the PMC or
governance body (board/members whatever) that the project has a strong
community and follows the rules and audits the lice
Leo Simons wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
How is it to be done?
Shoot.
JFDI applies.
I'm trying to recap, I had a hard time understanding some details in all
the mails I'm reading.
I think every PMC member and every ASF
member that had something to say about the PPMC idea
was basically in f
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
How is it to be done?
Shoot.
JFDI applies. I think every PMC member and every ASF
member that had something to say about the PPMC idea
was basically in favour. We have consensus on the broad
plan; enough of a mandate to get things underway. Create
a PPMC battle plan and
The Incubator has already undergone many changes since it's start.
In extreme summary we have created documents about an initial process,
decided that multiple Mentors on an incubating project are desired and
have a sufficient checklist to follow for the process.
Current status is summarized in
36 matches
Mail list logo
