incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <>
Subject Re: [doc] Incubation Policy -> "Acceptance of Proposal by Sponsor"
Date Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:42:25 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 3/15/06, Alan D. Cabrera <> wrote:
>> I have a concern about item 2.  It has been my experience that the Incubator PMC
can be a bit tardy in replying to emails.  May I suggest that the 72 hour window starts w/
item 1?  Given that, then item 2 seems superfluous.
> Well, given that we haven't tried this policy, I don't think it's fair
> to say that the Incubator PMC will be tardy on issuing the ACK -
> that'd be a fine complaint to make if you witness it after the policy
> is in effect.

I can extrapolate from past behavior on important podling votes.  My 
reservations are fair and based on past behavior.

> The Incubator PMC is delegated with the authority to approve code
> imports.  No other PMCs have the authority to approve code imports or
> podling creation.

I agree with your statement about code imports but I didn't realize that 
they could stop a podling from being created.  IIUC, the Incubator PMC 
has final say on graduation but not on initiation.  Am I wrong in this 

>> My next concern is in regard to 3.  It implies that if the Incubator PMC does not
positively vote for the incubation, then it does not get incubated.  IIUC, the Incubator PMC
cannot block the start of the incubation of a project that has been sponsored by another PMC.
 Maybe that changed, I may have missed that exchange.
> By and large, I would not expect #3 (someone saying 'no') to happen
> very much.  The only valid complaints are about the form and
> procedures being followed.  All other complaints by Incubator PMC
> members about a podling (such as that they don't like technology
> 'foo') should be bit-bucketed.  If people try to vote against a
> podling sponsored by another PMC because of personal non-procedural
> reasons, they're going to get hit with a cluebat.  -- justin

While I agree that this would be unlikely and that common sense should 
govern the behavior of good cooperative communities, are we not writing 


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message