incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] PMC Vote to incubate Directory Project
Date Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:07:04 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>> Sander Striker wrote:
>>>> From: Noel J. Bergman []
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:11 AM
>>>> My understanding from discussion with Sam and Ken was that creation 
>>>> of a new
>>>> TLP or migrating to an existing one would be an exit, not entry, issue.
>>> That's correct.  However, it wouldn't make much sense to let a 
>>> project enter when there is no notion of where it would exit too.
>> Section 6 of the 
>> describes a clear "notion of where it would exit too".
>> I don't believe that it is a reasonable expectation to have the board 
>> give prior approval of a new TLP as a prerequisite for entrance into 
>> incubation.
> I agree with Sam. It makes no sense that a new TLP is created for a 
> project that may even fail incubation.
> BTW, we also have AltRMI and FTPServer in Incubation and yet no exit 
> defined.
>> I have similar reservations about prior approval by target projects as 
>> a prerequisite for acceptance by the incubator.
> It is not, in fact.
> The rule is simple: a PMC has to vote that it wants that project.
> The PMC can be the Incubator itself, or another PMC. In the latter case, 
> the Incubator PMC does not need to vote, and operates to help the other 
> PMC in incubation.
> In this case, the vote is needed by the Incubator PMC as this project 
> aims to a new PMC.

If we are clarifying rules, we should account for board initiated 
projects, like Geronimo.

- Sam Ruby

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

View raw message