incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <>
Subject Re: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?
Date Sun, 05 Jan 2003 11:44:08 GMT
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 12:32:50AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> A similar argument goes towards extending our brand name to a project 
> to increase visibility of it.  It's great to have your project be a 
> part of the ASF.  I'm sure there are lots of projects that would like 
> to be a part of the ASF.  But, letting everyone join the ASF merely 
> dilutes the brand.

Or strengthens it.  Which is the whole point..

The way I see it:

Sourceforge = Thousands of projects, many good, but most bad
Apache      = Good projects which (in addition) follow ASF-style,
community-oriented development patterns.

The problem is that Apache-the-seal-of-quality is mixed up with
Apache-the-infrastructure-provider and Apache-the-legal-umbrella.  If the
Tapestry crowd aren't unhappy with SF hosting, and don't require legal
protection, why not just 'symlink' them into Jakarta by adding them to

> Nor do I agree with the fact that there is project synergy with other 
> ASF projects is a reason for inclusion.  I could say that about lots 
> of other open source projects that we're not responsible for.  Not 
> all projects under an ASF-style license have to be part of the ASF. 
> Nor do all implementations of a specific class of product have to be 
> found at the ASF.  The goal of the ASF isn't to house every open 
> source project or to build a product line.  That's SourceForge's 
> goal.  I believe *our* primary goal is to help develop new 
> communities.

Depends on if '*our*' mean the Incubator or Apache.

> To me, Tapestry seems a bit too mature for the ASF, and I don't think 
> we can add substantial value to Tapestry.  The word for this list is 
> 'incubator.'  This seems like an adoption rather than an incubation. 

Indeed.  Having mature projects go through an incubator seems rather
condescending and pointless.  If they're good enough, make'em top-level.
If they're not, what's wrong with Sourceforge?


> If someone has a compelling argument for addition, I'd like to hear 
> it.  But, I must say that I haven't seen one yet.  -- justin
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message