incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <>
Subject The incubator and Poland
Date Sun, 28 Sep 2003 19:03:51 GMT
So we're yack yacking about the incubator (again).  The incubator AFAICT
replicated a tricameral vote.  To release you must have:

1. A PMC vote to accept it
2. The committers of the project vote that they're ready to leave
3. The incubator PMC vote to let them out.

The only country that ever invested significantly in such a system was
Poland (other examples exist but the other bodies are subservient and
generally advise more than consent).  This was *one* of the times it was
wiped off the map. 

I would suppose #2 would the be the most vested group and #1 be the second
most (substituted for the board in the top level situation)... I'd suppose
#3 would be the least vested group.

The point?  None, I just like pointing my finger childishly when someone
does something silly (like create a tricameral voting system... pretty
funny, spell check doesn't recognize it, though it finds bicameral)...

Andrew C. Oliver
Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI
For Java and Excel, Got POI?

The views expressed in this email are those of the author and are almost
definitely not shared by the Apache Software Foundation, its board or its
general membership.  In fact they probably most definitively disagree with
everything espoused in the above email.

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

View raw message