incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "P. Taylor Goetz" <>
Subject Re: Poddlings length of time in the incubator
Date Wed, 29 Aug 2018 22:40:47 GMT

> On Aug 28, 2018, at 9:01 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Julian Hyde <> wrote:
>> Regarding Quickstep. I am a mentor. (One mentor resigned earlier this
>> year, but the other mentor, Roman, is sufficiently engaged.)
>> I am concerned that Quickstep is not going to graduate. They are
>> functioning well as an academic project, as evidenced by papers at top
>> conferences[1], but all of their contributors are from the same
>> university department. They have made a few efforts at community
>> building, but do not seem to be building a user base, or attracting
>> outside contributions.
>> (Note that traffic for July and August is lower than usual, due to
>> their contributors being in academia. Traffic on the dev list should
>> pick up somewhat in September.)
>> Embrace of Apache has been half-hearted. Note, for instance, that
>> their twitter account [2] still references their pre-Apache home page
>> [3] rather than their Apache page [4].
>> Quickstep made their first release in March 2017 but have not made
>> further releases. I am going encourage them to make a new release
>> soon. That will stimulate some community activity. But I am dubious
>> that this will attract outside contributors.
> Basically, I'm +1 on every single point that Julian makes, but having
> said this I'm unsure as to where can we go from here.
> In the past we typically shied away from setting deadlines for certain
> milestones in community development within podlings. This, in my view,
> somewhat encouraged this phenomenon of an "eternal podling" (active
> enough not to be in the attic, not active/ApacheWay'y enough to
> graduate). I feel like Quickstep, for example, can exist in this state
> indefinitely.

FWIW, for the DLab proposal [1], we added a voluntary incubation period max of 2 years, essentially
saying we didn’t want to become a resource drain. I haven’t checked to see if any other
projects have done this.

I’m also not sure if that’s in any way binding, or what the mechanics of that would be.
I imagine at the 2-year mark there would be a PPMC vote to either a) retire, or b) request
additional time from the IPMC. If b, then the IPMC would either approve or deny the extension

> Thanks,
> Roman.



>> Julian
>> [1]
>> [2]
>> [3]
>> [4]
>>> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 10:17 AM Mark Thomas <> wrote:
>>>> On 26/08/18 02:30, Justin Mclean wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I’ve discussed this some on the ODF toolkit dev list. Development was
recently moved to Git. The Incubator needs to decide if we will turnover the domains that
were donated in 2011 by IBM(?) to the only consistent developer. If that is true then we can
quickly let them retire, but survive on Github.
>>>> I also saw you mentioned it in a previous incubator report for the podling.
What are the domain names in question? I think doing as you suggested sounds like a good idea
do you want to take that back to the PPMC and discuss and/or vote on doing that.
>>>> Any other IPMC members think differently?
>>> The podling PMC can make a recommendation but the decision to release a
>>> domain name to a third party needs the approval of VP Brand Management.
>>> We also need to find the transfer agreements (if any) for those domains
>>> to see what the ASF agreed to at the time of donation. It is not unheard
>>> of for such agreements to include a clause that ownership reverts to the
>>> donor if the podling does not graduate.
>>> Mark
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, 7-Bit, 0 bytes)
View raw message