incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
Date Wed, 04 Mar 2015 18:41:45 GMT
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting <> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <> wrote:
> > At this point, I would like to open this document for soliciting as
> > wide a feedback as possible. I would like to especially request
> > attention of the ASF board members who asked for this type of
> > a document to be available.
> As a director, I still don't think the board needs to be involved in a
> pTLP's "graduation".  As far as I'm concerned, any "provisional"
> status is self-imposed by the PMC and can be removed at its pleasure.
> From the board's perspective it's either an ASF project or it's not,
> there's not a useful middle ground.  As a project it needs to provide
> reports, release according to accepted standards, operate openly, etc.
> It may be a young project, with a PMC dominated by old-timers who
> aren't responsible for much of the contribution, but I don't see why
> that requires a new formal status any more than we need a formal
> status for old, slow-moving projects that rarely release.
> Put directly, what does a pTLP's "graduation" change from the board's
> perspective?  How should it change the way we review the project's
> reports, etc.?  In short, why should we care about this label?  If a
> PMC wishes to call itself "blue" that's fine too, but we don't need a
> resolution when it decides to call itself "purple".

What's your view of 'incubation disclaimers'? The above paragraph makes
most sense to me if there are none for pTLPs.

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

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