incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niclas Hedhman <>
Subject Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)
Date Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:20:19 GMT
And here is another angle; ALL projects will die, it is just a matter of

Now, knowing that we need to deal with, and can't set out with the notion
that if we think it might whither it can't graduate, then I will need to
vote against all graduations.

So, IMHO, the "might die" criteria is sooo wrong, it makes me sick. I look
at it the other way; If it graduates it might flourish. And if one podling
do so (for a while), I am Ok with a couple that didn't.

If your intentions are for projects to die sooner, then keep them in

-- Niclas

On Aug 5, 2009 9:40 AM, "Ralph Goers" <> wrote:

On Aug 4, 2009, at 2:10 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 4,
2009 at 10:10 AM, Bertra...
You are trying to predict the future. Good luck with that.

The rules are there because we have a belief that meeting them will give the
project the best chance to succeed. I would argue that if this is your
measure you should take a look at Logback and SLF4J. The number of people
who have commit rights is very small (essentially 1 in the case of Logback).
But Ceki is a recognized expert in the field and is passionate about
logging. The odds of his abandoning the project are about equal to that of
him getting hit by a truck. But there are severl active participants in the
projects (myself included) and many more who stop by and ask questions.

Using these projects as an example is perhaps not the best from a community
perspective because Ceki has no intention of running them like Apache
projects. But even if he did, by these standards the projects might never
make it out of the incubator. Even if those of us who would like them had
commit rights I can guarantee that 95% of the commits would still be Ceki's.

>From my perspective we should be evaluating projects based on whether they
are building a healthy Apache community where we have sufficient belief that
the project will be able to sustain itself without further mentoring. IMO,
trying to factor in "what ifs" about what will happen if certain committers
leave, unless they have shown signs that that is likely, is not a very good
indicator of success. Over the course of time a project is in the incubator
I would expect that mentors to have a good sense of what the level of
commitment is and would use that as part of their recommendation for


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message