incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: a few steps before approving a project
Date Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:32:49 GMT
The problem is that, up until the Incubator, there was
relatively little oversight on new and incoming projects, at
least in how they entered the ASF. Certainly the board
could not keep track, and PMCs would occasionally
not keep the board up to date. You then add in the fact
that some of those projects had no concept of what
the ASF was about, etc,... and it was a non-optimal

The Incubator was designed to be a funnel and a clearinghouse
for new projects; yes, for the legal aspects, yes to
ensure that the community grows and develops as it
should, but also, I feel, to look at projects and
see how they fit; to basically be the eyes and ears of
the board with respect to these new projects.

Now certainly having a PMC sponsor a project says
a great deal and the Incubator does, and should,
know that that approval carries a lot of weight.
But again, I don't feel it is unreasonable for the
Incubator also formally accept a podling, via
some mechanism.

To be blunt, the PMC is worried about the PMC alone; the
Incubator is concerned about the ASF in general. Once in
a rare while, the 2 might have conflicts.

Lets be even more blunt. Once a podling is accepted
into the Incubator, it is awarded almost instant credibility.
Basically, it is using the Apache name and the Apache
brand. Certainly the Incubator should ensure that any
podling doesn't abuse that, and it should also ensure that
the proposal and podling isn't just an avenue for creating
instant buzz and instant credibility, for the benefit
of the podling 1st and the ASF secondly (or less).

The board has said many times, concerning growth, that
when the brakes need to be applied, the Incubator would
be the 1st entity to feel it, or want it. They are
the canary in the coal mine.

On Sep 1, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

> Jim,
> IMHO, Incubator CANNOT take a decision based on a proposal. A badly
> written proposal with best of intentions will not make it and folks
> will not resubmit stuff just because a similar proj got rejected
> before. I've always thought that the role of Incubator is to make SURE
> that a project is ready for becoming a normal ASF project.
> If we can't scale, it's our problem and we have to fix it. We should
> not fix it by closing our doors. Then its a old boys (and girls)
> club....
> -- dims
> On 9/1/05, Jim Jagielski <> wrote:
>> On Aug 31, 2005, at 7:25 PM, 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.
>> No, but it is the role of the Incubator to ensure that
>> new projects are in the best interest of the foundation,
>> and not simply be a rubber stamp. The Incubator, for
>> example, I think has the responsibility to be able
>> to say "You know, this is a great proposal, but there
>> are too many podlings right now, and we cannot accept
>> it" and have that honored.
>> For things as important as new projects within the
>> ASF, having the Incubator vote on acceptance is, I
>> think, a small consideration.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> --  
> Davanum Srinivas : - Oxygenating The Web Service  
> Platform
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message