incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Santiago Gala" <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto
Date Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:27:51 GMT
On Feb 4, 2008 4:54 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <> wrote:
> Roland Weber wrote:
> > I think that is a bit oversimplified. IBM has strict rules about
> > open source participation. It is either "on private time", such
> > as my involvement at Apache. Then the person is acting as an
> > individual. Or it is "on company time". Then the person is doing
> > what he or she is paid for. And if IBM is changing it's priorities,
> > or the line item that required OSS participation is closed, plenty
> > of other work will be dumped on that person, simply leaving no
> > (work) time for OSS participation. Yes, Apache attaches all merits
> > to the individual. But you cannot reasonably expect individuals
> > that got paid for working on an Apache project to continue their
> > involvement at a comparable level on private time, nor "judge"
> > them for retiring. The ultimate cause of reduced activity here
> > would be the employer's decision, not the individual's.
> You are absolutely right...
> Perhaps we should force all initial committers to divulge if they
> are strictly involved in the effort as a work assignment, or if they
> have a broader interest in the new podling?
> And certainly, we should judge contributing corporations on their
> prior projects successes and failures, and this should be one of
> the many factors that go into the +/-1 decision of accepting a project.
> Not the only factor, but one of many.  The failure of corporations
> to 'play nice with each other' is also one of those factors, if they
> are capable of participating in an open, transparent and collaborative
> development methodology required at and by the ASF.
> That said, we never "judge" people per-say for choosing to move on
> to some other projects or interest in their lives.  The code is here
> for the public, and if the public can't be bothered to contribute,
> then it's simply shelved.  No different than any commercial technology
> when a company looses interest in it.

+1 I think the relevant issue for incubation efforts is wether there
is a reasonable expectation that the current ("dropped") code base
will attract enough people from outside the donating company to
graduate. I say "reasonable expectation" and not "certainty", as
incubation is a bet, and it can succeed or not.

Once incubation is going on everything can happen, from success to
withdrawal before graduation, passing through stagnation before or
after graduation.


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

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

View raw message