incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <>
Subject Re: [pre-proposal] AsyncWeb
Date Sun, 16 Jul 2006 02:38:33 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 7/15/06, Alex Karasulu <> wrote:
>> Everyone else that has been working with Dave is already an ASF
>> committer with a CLA on file at the ASF:
>> Trustin Lee
>> Dan Diephouse
>> Alex Karasulu
>> Yes let's get that software grant and a CLA from you Dave.  Considering
>> the constituents of the project at safehaus we might be able to take up
>> Justin's earlier suggestion to possibly import the project: moving the
>> source, doco (confluence) and jira issues all at once to the ASF.
> I think then a software grant and iCLA/CCLA plus a completed IP
> Clearance form from an ASF Officer or Member is sufficient (see the IP
> clearance template for the instructions on submission).
> Depending upon how substantial the contributions were from the 3
> ASFers, we might need Trustin, Dan, and Alex to also sign the software
> grant too for AsyncWeb.  The official policy is that we need software
> grants signed from all developers - but if you guys just submitted
> minor patches, that's probably not necessary - but if you developed
> large chunks of AsyncWeb too, then a grant should be filed too even
> though you have iCLAs on file.
>> Also note that there are no dependencies except on MINA.
> Good.
>> Why don't we start the process of importing the project into Directory
>> for now as a MINA protocol example and get the MINA TLP proposal before
>> the board. With the move of MINA (and AsyncWeb) out of Directory,
>> AsyncWeb will be under a MINA TLP.
> Honestly, I'd recommend flipping it: get MINA to be TLP first and then
> move in AsyncWeb.  There's no reason that AsyncWeb should land in the
> Directory TLP and then move again in short-order.  Ensure that the
> submitted charter of MINA can incorporate AsyncWeb sufficiently.  If
> you submit the resolution ASAP, it'll make it into this month's Board
> meeting (which is likely to be Wednesday, but that's not confirmed
> yet).  You can add Dave to the initial MINA PMC roster even though his
> project isn't in just yet, too.  Or, you can add him after the IP
> paperwork is filed too - whatever works best.

I'm fine with this option as well.  Let's give it a try.  Do the rest of 
you guys agree with this approach?

>> Or do you still see incubation as being necessary for AsyncWeb even
>> after getting a Grant and CLA from Dave?
> I personally don't think so.  We're talking about one committer
> joining an already existing ASF project and that individual has
> already worked with at least three other ASFers.  If the legal
> paperwork is filed (i.e. grant and iCLA/CCLA), I don't see the point
> of 'full' Incubation.  MINA's getting a chunk of code...the Incubator
> PMC just needs to ensure that the legal paperwork is received first.
>> I'm asking these questions because then it will effect the way we write
>> the MINA proposal and whether or not we have to submit one for AsyncWeb.
>> How do we determine if this is a "boundry case" (quoting Noel's email)
>> for import rather than incubation?
> It's a smell test.  ;-)  -- justin

Smells good :).


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

View raw message