incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Lautenbach <>
Subject Re: Help!
Date Sat, 27 Dec 2003 06:07:38 GMT
Noel J. Bergman wrote:

>>will all developers be on a PPMC?  I wouldn't think so - I would
>>have thought it would be like a normal TLP, where those who are
>>guiding the project (hopefully nearly all committers - but not
>>necessarily) will be on the PMC.
> All active Committers should be on the PPMC, just as all active Committers
> ought to be on the PMC.  As in the case of an established project, there may
> a period between being granted commit karma and being granted a voting
> right, but in the case of a PPMC, especially early on, I think that a lower
> barrier is probably a good thing.  But we can leave that to the PPMC, IMO.

OK - This makes sense and is in line with what I expected.  I will 
change the wording slightly in the PPMC wiki doc to reflect.

>>In the case where the project is to become a sub-project of a landing
>>project, what is the PPMC for?
> To provide a management structure for the project, which is under the
> Incubator PMC, is expected to end up under another PMC, and has some set of
> Committers.

I've been handling sub-project issues a lot with the XML project, and 
there is an absolute assumption by the board that the PMC has active 
oversite of all code-bases in its domain.  If that's the case, then part 
of incubation should actually be to ensure that the landing PMC is fully 
up to speed with the code-base before hand-over.

In which case, the PPMC should be landing PMC + mentor (which should 
probably be on PMC anyway!) + incubator PMC members that are interested.

>>the PMC of the sponsoring project should pretty much be the PPMC
> No.  At the very least, it would consist of the Incubator PMC and the
> landing PMC.  The landing PMC does not get control until after the project
> leaves the Incubator.  The PPMC provides the structure by which both PMCs
> participate, along with the project's other Committers.

Ahh - we might be violently agreeing.  However, in the case of a 
sub-project going under an existing landing PMC, then maybe one should 
expect that the landing PMC does have control, except in strictly 
defined cases where the Incubator PMC needs to double check.  (Release 
code, status reports etc.)

After all - the PMC is supposed to be already doing this for other 
sub-projects, so the only thing the Incubator PMC should be doing is 
double checking the new players are doing the right thing and that 
nothing is being released under the Apache name until everyone is happy 
the project is out of incubation.

Additionally - we have said in a couple of places that the PPMC should 
be making the decisions.  The INcubator PMC is simply in on the loop to 
double check that the ASF is being protected during the incubation period.

>>Otherwise, we have this thing called the PPMC that is going to be
>>discarded completely when the sub-project gets to its landing PMC
>>- in this case I'm not sure what the value is?
> Hopefully the PPMC will be dissolved by merging it with the landing PMC.

Or by simply removing the Incubator PMC members

>>There is no point in having a "practice" (still hate that word :>)
> We dropped the "practice" designation.

So what does the extra "P" stand for now?


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

View raw message