Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
this sounds to me like a very good plan. thank you!
+1 :-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---
Ted Leung wrote:
On 9/22/2003 4:50 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: Rodent of Unusual Size
what's the role of the incubator pmc in this? at the least, it's a set
of passionate asf people who are essentially in agreement about what
makes something a genuine 'apache'-style project, who review
Ted Leung wrote:
I don't know if we want to tackle this at the same time as Steven's
document on entering the incubator, but at the moment I"m more focused
on how to get podlings out of the incubator rather than getting them in.
A while ago I proposed some exit criteria for XML beans -- I haven
Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
Roy,
Please note that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
list is suffering the same disease.
I said this before at that mailing list. Noone responded.
It (nonfeasance) really humiliated me.
I'm the moderator there, and I didn't see your mail.
I apologise for missing it, it was not intent
> From: Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think that Berin and I are aiming at the same objective and have very
> similar motives. I happen to think that we can leverage and utilize the
> contribution of Berin's process by analysing his concers and underlying
> interests and drawing fr
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Thus you have the shepherd appointed by the sponsor PMC, but being
bound by the Incubator PMC
rules and regs. (And I would imagine the incubator
would need to agree the choice.)
Which does not work in practice (with respect to current policy).
The Icubator PMC has been
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Engagement by the XMLbeans community with the XML PMC and other ASF
sub communities, particularly infrastructure@ (this reflects my
personal bias that projects should pay an infrastructure "tax").
Incubator PMC has voted for graduation
XML PMC has voted for final a
Steven Noels wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Engagement by the XMLbeans community with the XML PMC and other ASF
sub communities, particularly infrastructure@ (this reflects my
personal bias that projects should pay an infrastructure "tax").
Incubator PMC has voted for graduation
XML PMC h
Steven Noels wrote:
Do I read you correct in saying that the receiving PMC has no chance
anymore to declare an incubation failed, if the Incubator PMC says the
contrary? In that case (and I hope I'm wrong), why is the receiving PMC
involved then?
I've put something slightly different into the I
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
The sponsoring PMC asks to have that project. This means that it *wants*
that project and that community. Why would it change its mind?
Maybe there were reservations that the PMC wanted to have covered off
during incubation. The best way to ensure that everyone is comf
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Exactly.
The sponsoring PMC asks to have that project. This means that it *wants*
that project and that community. Why would it change its mind?
Because of things happening during incubation. What if a podling becomes
a mutant during incubation, in the best case changi
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Thus you have the shepherd appointed by the sponsor PMC, but being
bound by the Incubator PMC
rules and regs. (And I would imagine the incubator
would need to agree the choice.)
Which does not work in practice (with respect to current policy).
T
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
The sponsoring PMC asks to have that project. This means that it
*wants* that project and that community. Why would it change its mind?
Maybe there were reservations that the PMC wanted to have covered off
during incubation.
Practical example?
Peoples,
Have done another update and tried to represent the results of the
various comments during the day. Have mainly tried to :
1) Re-emphaise the role of a Sponsor as an ongoing role. No particular
requirements in the process (other than initial recommendation), but
have stated that the
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
An incubation needs someone that actively nutrures the community, pushes
the agenda and reports to the PMC of which he is part.
I call him the sponsor.
We also need someone that is knowlegable of how the Incubator works and
that reports to the Incubator PMC.
I call him
Steven Noels wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Exactly.
The sponsoring PMC asks to have that project. This means that it
*wants* that project and that community. Why would it change its mind?
Because of things happening during incubation. What if a podling becomes
a mutant during incubation, in
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
If a project cannot work well with the Sponsor PMC it's a failure, the
Incubator will not agree to make it go. It may decide to swith targets,
but imposing a project on non-willing PMC is simply out of question.
Which may require a vote of the PMC in question to determi
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
If a project cannot work well with the Sponsor PMC it's a failure, the
Incubator will not agree to make it go. It may decide to swith targets,
but imposing a project on non-willing PMC is simply out of question.
OK - good. Mind you that I don't intend this to be a criti
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
If a project cannot work well with the Sponsor PMC it's a failure, the
Incubator will not agree to make it go. It may decide to swith
targets, but imposing a project on non-willing PMC is simply out of
question.
Which may require a vote of the
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
An incubation needs someone that actively nutrures the community,
pushes the agenda and reports to the PMC of which he is part.
I call him the sponsor.
We also need someone that is knowlegable of how the Incubator works
and that reports to the
Steven Noels wrote:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
If a project cannot work well with the Sponsor PMC it's a failure, the
Incubator will not agree to make it go. It may decide to swith
targets, but imposing a project on non-willing PMC is simply out of
question.
OK - good. Mind you that I don't int
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
It's about having an "elder" shepherd mentoring the main shepherd, and
possibly requiring at least two people helping in Incubation.
What do others think about this?
Over-regulation.
--
Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Op
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Would be great if you could have a read through the new version of
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
I'm hoping that it is something that will work. I've actually got it
such that the Shepherd reports to both. The Sponsor is someone who
he
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
>
> I've put something slightly different into the IncubatorMussings
> document. I've said that the Incubator PMC *recommends* to the
> Sponsoring Entity (the receiving PMC) that something has completed,
> needs to continue or fails.
no, i don't think so. the incubato
On 9/23/2003 5:31 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
There is only one point that I have different in my mind and that is
IIUC addressed there.
It's about having an "elder" shepherd mentoring the main shepherd, and
possibly requiring at least two people helping in Incubation.
I think that there a
On 9/23/2003 5:29 AM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Would be great if you could have a read through the new version of
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
I'm hoping that it is something that will work. I've actually got it
such that the Shepherd reports to both. The Spon
Nicola,
> > Would be great if you could have a read through the new version of
> > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
> Done. It's *very* well writtem :-)
> There is only one point that I have different in my mind and that is
> IIUC addressed there.
> It's about havi
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Would be great if you could have a read through the new version of
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Its looking good.
One point concerning the description of the Sponsoring Entity. I
currently includes a sub-heading "Responsibilities o
Question. Is there any issue with a link to XMLBeansProjectPages being on the Apache
Wiki home page? If so, would it go under the XMLProjectPages or under some new
IncubatorProjectPages?
thx,
rem
> Is there any issue with a link to XMLBeansProjectPages being
> on the Apache Wiki home page?
Go ahead and at it here:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ApacheIncubatorProjectPages.
That is linked off of the Wiki home page.
--- Noel
--
On 9/23/2003 12:10 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
Meritocracy / Community
Demonstrate an active and diverse development community
No single organization supplies more than 50% of the active
committers (must be at least 3 independent committers)
How do you assess that? Are
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
For example, for Lenya I'm wondering if Cocoon is the right place for
them, as I've not seen much involvment. I'll wait and see, but for
now I would not vote for exit as there is not much integration.
As a member of the Cocoon, or Incubator PMC?
Is there a differenc
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Sam,
AFAIK, software-grant.txt is it. The license-grant appears related to the
original license grant for the ASF.
Seems to me that the software grant ought to be PDF'd nicely like the
others, and put along side the CLA, so that outside projec
On Monday, September 22, 2003, at 07:48 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i (for one) would not feel able to support any vote to push any
sub-project out of jakarta (though i do think that this would be a good
thing for more than one sub-project.) i think that any push
Ted Leung wrote:
>On 9/23/2003 12:10 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>> Ted Leung wrote:
>>> Meritocracy / Community
>>> Demonstrate an active and diverse development community
>>> No single organization supplies more than 50% of the active
>>> committers (must be at least 3 independent committ
Robert,
I renamed the thread, which has nothing to do with the Directory project,
and really no longer belongs here, but here it is. Perhaps community@ would
be better?
> if you had said "i'll volunteer to help every jakarta sub-project
> to realize that they want their own top level project" th
On Tuesday, September 23, 2003 2:01 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
(requriment on minimum number of such releases?)
>>> two?
>> That's two "Not official ASF releases" ;-)
>
> LOL Call them "Dress Rehearsals" :-) I agree that they should learn
> the process until it becomes a habit.
>
> I don't
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Robert,
I renamed the thread, which has nothing to do with the Directory project,
and really no longer belongs here, but here it is. Perhaps community@ would
be better?
if you had said "i'll volunteer to help every jakarta sub-project
to realize that they want their own
On Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 10:16 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Robert,
I renamed the thread, which has nothing to do with the Directory project,
and really no longer belongs here, but here it is. Perhaps community@
would
be better?
i'm a bit fed up with this the whole thread. i now seem to
On Monday, September 22, 2003, at 07:54 AM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
See http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html for the httpd project's
guidelines. They use the term "release" the way that Jakarta projects
will
use the term "build", but the overall effect is the same. Se
"Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 24/09/2003 08:39:08
AM:
[snip]
> As a committer on a (hopefully :-) mature Jakarta subproject (Struts), I
As a committer on top level and not top level projects:
> think there's another dimension here. Can we articulate the advantages
> of b
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > You can call it the "anti-big-company" rule.
>
> Diversity is good on the grounds that (a) no one company can control the
> direction of an ASF project, and (b) the fate of one company doesn't dictate
> the fate of the project.
But also that the fa
> while they are in the Incubator, they must ensure these releases are
> clearly labeled as being incubator releases, which are not fully
> endorsed by the ASF
> Does this fit with what you had in mind?
Works for me. But you should make sure that it works for the Incubator PMC.
As I understand f
Craig,
All good points. Another is that some projects have a natural synergy, and
fit well together.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, Berin. All,
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:18:44 +1000
(Subject: Re: ASF member role - accountable to whom)
Berin Lautenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd like to say, "Those who would write articles in the newsletter
> > draft, are worthy to become members, because they really care
> > for the
Tetsuya,
Most people just want to write code or discuss code. If you want articles,
I hate to say it, but you would generally lucky to get someone to send you
an e-mail about the latest interesting thing with their project, and you'd
have to edit it into something resembling an blurb.
Occasional
> From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > It's about having an "elder" shepherd mentoring the main shepherd, and
> > possibly requiring at least two people helping in Incubation.
> As someone who has seen multiple incubations, you feel that there is an
> expertise related to incubation he
> From: Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> One point concerning the description of the Sponsoring Entity. I
> currently includes a sub-heading "Responsibilities of the Sponsoring
> Entity". The content is basically describing responsibilities of the
> Shepherd. It would read better if t
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It's about having an "elder" shepherd mentoring the main shepherd, and
possibly requiring at least two people helping in Incubation.
As someone who has seen multiple incubations, you feel that there is an
expertise related to inc
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Monday, September 22, 2003, at 07:48 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
...
Listen dude, I asked the Ant project myself to move, and got flamed
for that. I lobbied some James guys to do the same. I brought the
discussion forward on the com
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>
while they are in the Incubator, they must ensure these releases are
clearly labeled as being incubator releases, which are not fully
endorsed by the ASF
Does this fit with what you had in mind?
Works for me. But you should make sure that it works f
Ted Leung wrote:
On 9/23/2003 12:10 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
Meritocracy / Community
Demonstrate an active and diverse development community
No single organization supplies more than 50% of the active
committers (must be at least 3 independent committers)
How do you ass
On 9/23/2003 3:51 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
FWIW
my experience at jakarta has been that momentum is much more important
than Releases. in fact, some of the most talked about new java products
here at apache (maven, jelly, geronimo) have never had a Release.
My experience talking to non-
53 matches
Mail list logo
