incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: Disclaimer text for incubated projects
Date Fri, 03 Oct 2003 12:53:05 GMT
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 02:19:50PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
> ...
> > To what document do I need to add rule that says "a project ABSOLUTELY
> > MUST make clear that it is under incubation?"
> If we kept all incubated projects under the incubator it would have been 
> clear enough.

I'm alright with that, but I think we need infrastructure sign-off first.
If they respond with, "holy crap. moving cvs repositories and mailing
lists are the biggest pains in the ass", then we may want to reconsider
"everybody under". If the response is, "pfft. no big
deal. we can easily move mailing lists and cvs repositories" then I'd
agree with you. Put *everybody* under incubator and only move them when
they exit.

[ cc'd infrastructure for commentary ]

> > We've already been through
> > this process where incubated projects are not being clear about their
> > status; that needs to be captured and retained for ALL incubated projects.
> Proposal: if we still don't want to make incubator-xxx repositories for 
> these files, I would still suggest that:
>    1 - the websites are placed in
>    2 - these projects have as project logo the Incubator Logo
>    3 - They all have as a bottom line disclaimer a note that the project
>        is in incubation

Since the web site is the primary "arrival point" for the projects, this
would do the trick. Depending on infrastructure@'s response, I'd totally
agree with this. I'll go one step further and note that the Board has
mandated that the Incubator is a required step for incoming projects;
thus, all PMCs must follow its rules for incoming projects. IOW, a PMC
cannot maintain a separate website, but must always defer to the incubator
pages pending exit-from-incubation.

> Greg, if you want to be more sure that it's done, IMO we need to be a 
> bit more normnative and say *exactly* what is needed to have.

Agreed. Thus my query: where? :-)

And with the "where" question, we are pending infrastructure's

> I think the above proposal is reasonable, as it minimizes the 
> infrastructure changes when the project is out of incubation (basically 
> 0) and keeps the project clearly in incubation.

Agreed. Great recommendation!


Greg Stein,

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

View raw message