incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason van Zyl <>
Subject RE: projects incubated by the incubator PMC
Date Tue, 09 Dec 2003 04:37:16 GMT
On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 22:37, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > > > I would propose those documents be changed to state that what is
> > > > outlined above is a prerequisite for entry into the incubator.
> > > -1.
> > So you can veto a vote I would propose to members I feel is in the best
> > interest of preserving the integrity of the software here.
> Where did you see a veto?  A -1 is a veto on code, not P&P.
> > I find it ridiculous that a body of code can land here
> > with absolutely no direction.
> I accept that as your view.  I disagree with you, but I accept your opinion
> as yours.
> > In the past when the incubator didn't exist when new bodies of code came
> > in they became entities like, or fell
> > under one of those TLPs.  Why should it be any different now?
> For the reasons that brought the Incubator into existence.

What's that in a sentence or less?

The site says to provide an entry path into Apache like there never was
one before. I am responsible for bringing BCEL, XmlRpc, OJB and various
bits and bobs in the commons. All of those were because the people
working on these projects were resourceful enough to find someone to
champion their entry into Apache. I'm sure most people see Apache as
fairly incestuous but people could always get projects here if they
tried. I didn't know anyone on any of those projects before hand so it
wasn't nepetism that got them landed here at Apache.

You speak as if there was no possible way to get into Apache before the
Incubator. Maybe for those who wanted a free lunch ticket but not for
anyone else.

> > Apache shall simply become a directory of projects whereby the
> > only requirement is successful incubation?  If so I think that
> > definitely requires a vote because as a member that's not what
> > I see Apache being.
> Well, first of all, successful incubation isn't nothing.  

I didn't say it was nothing I am insisting that the incubation process
include the specification of a final destination whether as a TLP or
within an existing TLP to prevent the Incubator from becoming
ApacheForge which is something I would prefer not to see.

> It means that the
> project *started* with a Member or Officer sponsoring it, and the Incubator
> PMC voting to give it a chance.  And then it was able to attract a
> sustainable community, and operate according to Apache principles.  But you
> are implying that you have a particular vision for the ASF.  What is that?

How is what I personally see Apache as relevant to my requesting a very
simple thing of requiring a desired destination within Apache as part of
the Incubation process.

I don't see why this as seen as such a burdensome piece of information
to provide.


Jason van Zyl

In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
  -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message