incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bernd Fondermann <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Date Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:40:46 GMT
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:42, ant elder <> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
> <> wrote:
>> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
>>>> impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the
>>>> Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just
>>>> wanted to check, thanks guys!
>>> The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any
>>> Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit
>>> would be a good thing.
>> And the podling's committee itself seeks the extra guidance as they become
>> a self-managing committee, so the mentors all agreed with this proposal.
>> If anything, it makes checking off the graduation matrix much simpler as
>> they are already committers, we already have the IP vetting when the code
>> came into Hadoop.  We should obviously re-review the grants and trademark
>> assignments during incubation.
> I'm not totally convinced by that reasoning, wouldn't it be simpler to
> just go directly to TLP and have those listed here as mentors agree to
> help out by being on the initial PMC?

Maybe simpler, but better?
I've only been involved in this process since yesterday or so, but I
trust those who set out going the Incubator road.
And the project doesn't loose anything with following it, even if it's a detour.
The Incubator has more eyeballs than any other PMC and has tools to
prepare projects to go TLP.
We have far more projects eager to go TLP ASAP without properly
preparing their PMCness than those openly saying we want to learn how
to do it right first.

> If it does incubate what would be delaying its graduation? Its already
> got everything we list in the incubator docs - diverse committers,
> done several releases etc.

IIUC, the only issue right now is that the committers are hesistant to
go TLP because they've never been on a PMC before.

> The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing
> lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be
> using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a
> special case?

Good catch. I think the Incubator nomenclature should apply to Chukwa as well.


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

View raw message