incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@outlook.com>
Subject Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache
Date Wed, 03 Jul 2019 04:29:45 GMT
Jim said "Let's also recall that the origin genesis of the Incubator was NOT to provide legal
oversight, but rather education and guidance into The Apache Way"

I say... HEAR! HEAR!

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

________________________________
From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 4:36:02 AM
To: Incubator General
Subject: Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache



> On Jul 1, 2019, at 1:45 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> FWIW, I reconcile it as:
>
> Incubator is a PMC and must record a business decision to call something an ASF release
in order to place that release under the legal protection of the ASF.  ASF releases may have
policy non-compliance issues.  No TLP can decide on its own to never comply with policy. 
But the business decision of the costs of delaying a release to correct non-compliance vs
risks of distributing a release with any non-compliance is up to the TLP.  VP Legal will assert
a risk profile for any non-compliance and VP Legal or any ASF Member or PMC Member should
try to stop a release if a TLP decides to distribute something highly risky.   But it is up
to any TLP.  Including the IPMC.  And so the Incubator can do whatever it wants within limits.
 Any of us should protest if the IPMC starts allowing releases with high risk.  But with the
disclaimer and -incubating suffixes, the risk of many non-compliance issues are low, even
CatX and binary inclusions.
>
> Whether the incubator needs to have a secondary vote is not required by the above.  IPMC
members could drop in on the podling vote thread.  Podlings with 3 active mentors that vote
on the podling's vote thread could be deemed sufficient.
>

Although not a "real" PMC, we do need to provide legal protection for each PPMC and distributing
releases is the time that most legal considerations "kick in" as it were. So we need a clear
"paper trail" of approvals for that PPMC to enjoy the legal protection the foundation exists
to provide. The IPMC vote, since the IPMC is, in fact, a true PMC, provides that legal provenance
such that, should anything untoward happen, we can clearly show to outside legal entities
corporate provenance without having to try to explain the intricacies of podlings, and PPMCs
and PMC and et.al. :-)

Let's also recall that the origin genesis of the Incubator was NOT to provide legal oversight,
but rather education and guidance into The Apache Way (TAW). Back then we had way too many
projects that were TLP status that lacked even a basic awareness of TAW, and the board, rightfully,
considered that a huge problem (this started with the mismanagement of the Jakarta project,
which tried to create a sub-foundation within the ASF such that the Jakarta PMC was basically
the "board" of that "foundation"... as these projects spun out, problems aplenty ensued).
And so the Incubator was created to handle that problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


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