From general-return-33264-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Mon Jan 9 04:43:26 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 032989938 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 04:43:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 55308 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jan 2012 04:43:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 54399 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jan 2012 04:42:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 54379 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jan 2012 04:42:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 04:42:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.47] (HELO mail-lpp01m010-f47.google.com) (209.85.215.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 04:42:06 +0000 Received: by lami14 with SMTP id i14so1154487lam.6 for ; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 20:41:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=W6L0GnS3qGKJZITMWZSjneSZ5TEaPsR+8ksYGvc7nBw=; b=Ap3+ugBW4LVGTzsknRA3hm7UupxTSrwu9tpCOoDK33+6e5hNUcWpw9DNQQLXZWYqxP 6W+EAV8scqKvLYPkdmwq+H0u6eRMPbbDUsYgZd/3/ONdVvwJjmnqJ6ifiAJCV14YIA7B qjJ1Q7mMHehVDs7T9vL4GoCNTlluCQp/9AOuY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.134.10 with SMTP id pg10mr6315253lab.3.1326084105613; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 20:41:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.152.111.37 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 20:41:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2012 20:41:45 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Small but otherwise happy podlings From: Kalle Korhonen To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > This has been the subject of prior conversations, but I'm opening a > thread in some hope of reaching a definitive resolution. > Some of our non-graduating podlings have a common problem. They look > good in all ways except growth. This inhibits graduation from 2.5 > standpoints: > 1) they are dubiously large enough to sustain as a TLP. > 2) they don't have much (or any) track record in incorporating new contributors. > 2.5) they might not be very diverse. I list this as a .5 because I > think that we've established that diversity is a lower priority. > There are some possible responses to this situation. > a) toss them out of the incubator. > b) keep them in the incubator indefinitely. > c) graduate them, but with some conditions. Should smaller incubator projects be encouraged to graduate as sub-projects of existing projects or is that not an option anymore? Specifically, I was thinking about Amber, which might just work as a sub-project of Apache Shiro if they are too small to make it on their own. However, we (the Shiro PMC) haven't suggested this to them and they haven't contacted us. Since Jakarta, my understanding is that the incubator would rather see the projects graduating as TLPs, not sub-projects, is that correct? Kalle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org