incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira>
Subject Re: a few steps before approving a project
Date Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:37:07 GMT
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Cliff,
>>- change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official
>>charter) to include approving of all new projects
> To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to second
> guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects.
>>- ensure all proposals use the same standard template
> Fine.
>>- add a question to the template asking whether the person(s)
>>proposing are aware of similar open source projects inside or
>>outside the ASF.
> To what end?  I know what is motivating this.  In my view, any group that
> wants to part of the ASF, under our IP and Community policies, is welcomed.
> The ASF should not be in the business of forbidding people to work on things
> here just because someone else feels that it should be happening in their
> fiefdom.  We don't even require uniqueness within the ASF, much less between
> us and other groups.  Should JAMES insist that the HTTP Server project shut
> down mod_smtpd?

And what if such a project involves forking another communities code and 
claiming some of their committers? Does it not concern you _how_ that 
happens, and how it makes the ASF look? In my mind, it isn't a question 
of whether or not a project should start, but that the ASF should _know_ 
the baggage that a project will bring with it, and the issues it might 
bring in relation to other projects, so that we can ensure that the 
starting of the new project maintains rather than degrades our relations 
with other projects.

That's all this is about in my book. If I were to be in a position to 
decide about an incubating project, I'd like to know who might be 
offended by the starting of that project _before_ I make my decision - 
even if I decide to accept it. It just makes life easier, and more 
predictable all-round.

>>consider having a formal liaison at a few key external open source
>>communities to give a friendly notice to whenever the Incubator PMC
>>knows there's a proposal that could be controversial
> I am in favor of liaisons with other communities, but even making the
> judgment call required above is claiming a subjective value.

Well yes. That's the judgement call that ultimately is going to have to 
come from the original proposing PMC, or the people making the proposal. 
They're the ones who know the landscape. Hence the need for questions on 
the proposal template to prompt them to tell us.

>>require that the Incubator PMC loops in the PRC on any project that
>>could have any chance of media attention (either because of there
>>overall significance of the project, the potential for controversy,
>>expected vendor press releases, or the opportunity to release a joint
>>statement with some other organization).
> EVERY project should involve the PRC.  The PRC is entirely underused, even
> if overcommitted.
> And don't forget that contrary to what was said on this thread, existing
> PMCs *can* start their own projects from existing ASF committers and new
> codebases that are developed within the ASF infrastructure without going
> through the Incubator.  The motivation for your e-mail would apply to those
> as well.

Not so much in my mind. If there's no interaction in terms of code or 
committers, but only in 'subject area', then it is more just plain old 
competition. We may want to consider competitors, but this discussion 
isn't about competitors, it is about people who might be directly 
affected by our actions - e.g we fork their code.

Regards, Upayavira

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

View raw message