incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian McCallister <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Changes to Incubator process(es)
Date Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:34:33 GMT
On Jan 11, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

> [ -1 ] - Any proposal should hit general@incubator first, No PR  
> before that.
> [ -1 ] - Any PR should be vetted by PRC, No Excuses.

If this includes blogging about it (which recently was an issue) then  
it won't work, regardless of what we want. This is addressing a real  
problem, but is not an enforceable option unless we know what PR  
means, and "No Excuses" is insufficient as it implies any  
communication with the public, which simply won't work.

A bad solution to a problem is not a solution and creates barriers to  
a good solution.

> [ -0 ] - Any new proposal should have 3 ASF Members / Officers as  
> mentors
> (without regard to affiliation)

Current ASF projects which have less than that now. A mentor who  
isn't a contributor is probably a bad idea, so what does it say if  
current projects fail incubator requirements?

> [ -1 ] - Any new proposal should list at least one person as a
> infrastructure volunteer.

Nice in theory, not doable in practice. Should be strongly encouraged  
to help with infrastructure, but no way it should be a requirement.

> [ -1 ] - A sponsoring PMC should hold their VOTE to sponsor a  
> proposal or
> IP Clearance 72 hours *AFTER* it is posted on general@incubator

PMC sponsors projects to the incubator. Let the PMC talk it over  
ahead of time and decide on a course of action.

> [ -0 ] - Any existing committer from any Apache project should be  
> able to
> volunteer to work on the proposed project within the 72 hours. Any
> later, it would be through regular karma process. (To promote
> inclusion/diversification from day one)

I think this is a bad solution to a real problem. I don't have a  
better solution at the moment.

> [ -1 ] - IP Clearance needs to be preceded by a proposal posted to
> general@incubator as well

A PMC isn't allowed to discuss wanting to bring code in?

> [ +1 ] - IP Clearance has to be OK'ed by Incubator PMC VOTE (before  
> code
> gets checked in to a sponsoring project's SVN)

Isn't this required now?

> [ -1 ] - Petition the Board to require Incubator PMC VOTE to begin
> incubation process even for projects that other PMC's want to sponsor.

This removes the ability for PMC's to bring code in. Where do we draw  
the line between code donations and patches?

> [ -1 ] - Within 72 hours of a new project hitting the  
> general@incubator
> mailing list, that any incubator PMC member can call for an advisory
> vote and comment period if they see issues with what's been presented
> by the sponsoring PMC.

They can do this now, how is it a change?


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

View raw message