incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henning Schmiedehausen <>
Subject Re: On incubating releases
Date Tue, 30 Sep 2008 05:01:32 GMT
On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 14:41 +0200, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
> Branching off from the release distribution vote.
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Jukka Zitting <> wrote:
> > This vote has made it quite clear that we have a much deeper
> > disagreement over the status of incubating releases, and that we
> > really should reach some consensus on that before nailing down
> > decisions on release distribution.
> AFAUI there are three positions that people are advocating:
>     a) Releases with no other strings than the ALv2 attached
>     b) Releases with requirements to notify downstream users
>     c) No releases
> Personally I think that position b conflicts with both the letter and
> the spirit of ALv2, and that position c is damaging to incubating
> projects. Also, if a was not an option, I'd rather opt for c than b as
> I think c is at least a logically consistent position.

Yes. c) is the logical position on incubating projects. However

- How does that benefit the wish of "attracting community"?
- How does that differ from labs? 

I won't lobby for a) or b). What I lobby for is a consistent policy that
adheres to the principle of least surprise. We don't have that today. I
did vote -1 not because I think that the current position is all fun and
games, but because it is the adopted policy of the incubator as stated
on the incubator pages. Changing it on a whim through a vote thread is
IMHO not fair to the people who designed and hammered out the current
processes and I am willing to believe that there is a concept behind the
current "incubator releases are not Apache releases" policy.

You can't simply turn this over by running a vote on "let's distribute
that stuff without strings attached". The consequence is that IPMC
members starting to vote down *every* incubator release until that is
resolved. According to Apache voting rules, there is no vetoing
releases, though, but having a significant number of -1 votes on every
release might set some thought processes in motion (Uh, why does this
start to smell like JCP from the wrong side?)...


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

View raw message