incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <>
Subject Re: who decides? (was: [Tapestry-contrib] Re: Tapestry?)
Date Mon, 06 Jan 2003 03:36:05 GMT

On Sunday, January 5, 2003, at 02:27  PM, Greg Stein wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:31:43AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> ...
>>> I'd agree with this last sentence. But given the Tapestry
>>> developers  originally put the proposal to Jakarta, and that all
>>> new projects were  supposed to come through 'incubation' (AFAIK),
>>> that's how they got here.
>> And, perhaps, the role of the Incubator is to place a brake on some
>> of the growth.  Or, perhaps not (the incubator PMC gets to decide).
>> Uncontrolled growth may not be beneficial long-term.  But, I've yet
>> to see a discussion on how much growth we're willing to handle.
> That is absolutely not the role for the Incubator. The Board did not 
> create
> it with the idea that it is the decision maker on what belongs at the 
> ASF.
> That is up to all of the PMCs. The Incubator is for dealing with their
> decisions -- for bringing the code in and ensuring the new community
> observes our requirements and ideals.

That's quite harsh, and I think you're missing Justin's point. It seems
to me he's saying that the Incubator is here to make sure that
new projects follow our rules and don't get out of control. It is
obvious that this is a problem that Incubator was created in part to
solve. Staying under control may mean "placing a brake" on the 
of some of the current PMCs, at least to begin with, but once we're all
on the same page WRT ASF expectations, oversight obligations, etc...
then I don't see the Incubator acting as a "brake" anymore.

> The Jakarta PMC said "yes, we want it" and now the Incubator is 
> responsible
> for dealing with that.

Correct, assuming "it" is in line with the foundation philosophies:

        RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC is responsible for
        regularly evaluating products under its purview and making the
        determination in each case of whether the product should be
        abandoned, continue to receive guidance and support, or
        proposed to the board for promotion to full project status as
        part of an existing or new Foundation PMC; and be it further

> If the HTTPD PMC said "yes, we want mod_whatzit" then the Incubator 
> brings
> it into the ASF.
> But the Incubator *CANNOT* dictate their ideas of what is or is not 
> "proper"
> for the ASF to those other PMCs. Absolutely not. If there is any 
> question
> about that, then I'm more than happy to get an official statement from 
> the
> Board to that effect.

I don't believe it is within the responsibility or right of the 
PMC to tell other PMCs how to interpret their own charters. That means 
at a technological level Incubator has little or no say. That is not
what is on the table here, though. What's on the table is whether or not
said new project(s) are in line with ASF philosophies, and if they ever 
be. That is most definitely under the purview of the Incubator PMC:

        RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC is responsible for
        providing guidance and ensuring that subprojects under its
        purview develop products according to the Foundation's
        philosophy and guidelines for collaborative development; and be
        it further

So who defines this? Think of it this way -- the Incubator is the
executive branch, and the members are the legislators.

> "Wah wah, but that means the PMCs can create unbounded work for us." 
> Those
> other PMCs should be participating in the process. If they impose too 
> much
> work and the incubation process slows as a result, then they can help 
> it
> along (in their own self-interest) by adding their own people to the 
> mix.

That's not a fear I have, actually quite the contrary. If that's a 
problem we
have then the ASF is probably doing pretty well.


View raw message