incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <>
Subject Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Date Fri, 02 Sep 2005 18:54:50 GMT
On Sep 1, 2005, at 9:53 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

> Am hurt by the words "You turned this into a Web Services marketing
> event" (Though i made it really clear multiple times that there was
> only on press release that i was part of and that was vetted by the
> prc@) But i will live and learn. Am still waiting for someone to point
> out to an actual problem ("factually incorrect press releases"). Last
> time i checked, people pay to put out press releases to make them look
> good. ("seek to spin Synapse into something that makes other companies
> look good.").

Ah, maybe you are missing how corporations work in the US.
If you ask a corporation to join a collaborative project with other
companies, they expect to do a press release about it.  In fact,
if they are a public company, they are mandated by the SEC and
antitrust laws to do a press release to avoid lawsuits over insider
trading. Public companies must be even-handed when informing the
public of events that might impact their share price.

If you want to avoid that, just start the project and don't ask
companies to get involved -- ask individual developers.

The only problem I know of in the Synapse releases was the lack
of "Apache Synapse" in the project name.  It didn't bother me. AFAIK,
this thread wasn't even directly about Synapse -- we were talking
about press and incubated projects in general.

> May be justin is right, we should ban anyone involved in any incubator
> project from making press releases. As far as i know no one has caught
> flak so far derby had press releases, beehive had them, stdcxx had
> them...

Eh?  stdcxx is in considerable danger of being flushed down the
toilet because of a Roguewave press release and the fact that
none of the three mentors seems to have enough time to actually
mentor the project.  Derby press releases were a huge discussion
at the time (even with three ASF board members guiding the project).
Beehive was carefully monitored by Cliff at the time and I don't
recall any problems there.

> But hey you picked us to be the scape goat and use it as an
> excuse for introducing a "NO PRESS RELEASES" policy. That's fine.

Actually, I think Justin was fed up with the stdcxx folks.  The
Gartner crap (which is always crap) just happened to come along
at the wrong time.

> If you don't want companies to talk about their involvement in Apache
> projects, then make that a policy and ban ALL press releases (OR) make
> sure there are no press releases get out w/o prc approval.

The former is what people are proposing in this thread.  The latter
has been Apache policy for some time, though policies without
documentation are a waste of time.  I've already told the PRC that.

> While we
> are at it, we should probably have our say on contests like this as
> well ( Have you read the stdcxx
> press release? 
> (
> Why is it just us catching the flak?

The flak is on the PRC list, where it belongs.


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

View raw message