incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Schmidt <>
Subject Re: releasing from incubator? -- was: Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue
Date Wed, 08 Jun 2005 06:12:48 GMT
On 6/7/05, Noel J. Bergman <> wrote:

>> It just doesn't make sense to me to tell a community that believes it has
>> a "1.0" quality product that they have to call it a "test snapshot".
> Demo?  Technology preview?  Milestone?  Happy Meal?

All of those terms (or at least the first three ;-) are references to
code quality.  If we are keeping a project in incubation until its
community is of higher quality, why would we legislate terms that have
to do with code?

> Look, maybe this is hard to understand, especially if people are coming from
> an enviroment focused on code quality first, but this isn't about the state
> of the code.  It is about the state of the community.  

As I said in my prior post, I think we all agree on this -- this
shouldn't be hard for anyone to understand.

> We had a lot of long
> discussions regarding allowing any releases at all from the Incubator, and
> it is entirely intentional and deliberate that projects in the Incubator are
> not permitted to make anything that smells like an official release.  

I agree that they should not be permitted to make anything that
resembles an official *ASF-endorsed* released.


> Nor we we want projects to be overly comfortable with a nice long stay.  We
> want projects to be serious about getting out of the Incubator from the time
> that they get into it.  If this were to mean that projects would start to
> put more emphasis on commmunity development than on their code "just" so
> that they can get out of the Incubator and make releases ... EXACTLY!

I'd be surprised if any individual or company was comfortable having
to include the word "incubating" as part of every filename in their
release, nor comfortable having a paragraph in their README stating
that the project is not officially endorsed by the ASF, nor
comfortable being required by our PRC to mention incubation in any
PR-like materials.  I think all these are all good and effective

> Again, our emphasis is on a healthy developer communities that can be relied
> upon to be self-sustaining and follow ASF practices for many years.

You and I completely agree on this.  However, I am trying to separate
code quality labels from branding.  We all agree that incubation is
about building community -- until a project as reached the goals
around community development, we want to distinguish the project by
requiring the incubator branding -- not the full ASF branding.  I just
don't see what that has to do with letting a project indicate to its
users what degree of stability their code base is at or whether they
expect to maintain backward compatibility on their APIs (often
signalled by the "1.0" milestone).


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

View raw message