incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe Jr." <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Bloodhound to join the Incubator
Date Tue, 03 Jan 2012 16:48:12 GMT
On 1/3/2012 2:02 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2012 2:30 AM, "Ralph Goers" <> wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 11:15 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 2012 10:51 PM, "Ralph Goers" <>
> wrote:
>>>> Greg, I do not care one bit how much commit activity happens at Trac. As
>>>> long as there is some kind of active community it is improper to fork it
>>>> without their permission.
>>> Eh? You ever read the "rules for revolutionaries" page? The basic concept
>>> is: don't try to force two communities into one; when separate visions for
>>> the project occur, then separate them.
>>> I don't see it as our place to *judge* communities. If it is a fork, or a
>>> corporate spin-out, or a move, or brand new... All Good. We provide a
>>> temporary home in the Incubator to see if it can become a good, proper, and
>>> healthy Apache community. We don't turn them away a-priori based on their
>>> history.
>> Greg, this seems to be so much B.S as it apparently serves some
>> particular interest you have.
> I *do* have an interest in seeing Bloodhound be successful. I've always
> been very impressed with the approach the Trac people have taken. It is a
> great tool. It is a great project, but I think it can be better.
> Bugzilla is popuar, but crap. There is no other OSS issue tracker that is
> good and popular. Trac is te closest, and (IMO) best hope for filling this
> gap in the OSS toolset.
>> A PMC I am on had this exact conversation with board members several
>> months ago regarding a code base the project is dependent on that is housed
>> outside the ASF which we were considering bringing in as a subproject. We
>> were told that under no circumstances could we fork the code without the
>> "owner's" blessing, regardless of what the license allowed us to do. To me,
>> this answer is black and white.
> Not to me. :-)

Which is the problem, isn't it?  Note; hat switch, you are now speaking
with the authority of a Director.

>>> In my mind, the Trac core has slowed, and it needs revitalization and a new
>>> vision. Others may disagree, and do, and that's fine. But I don't think it
>>> is fine for us to make judgements of communities (or nascent ones!) who
>>> want to try something new. To pick up and go in a direction that others are
>>> not heading, or do not have the time to make.
>> I have no idea what you are saying. You ARE making a judgement on a
>> community by saying it isn't active enough and deserves to be forked.
>> Again, some of your fellow board members have said the ASF isn't the place
>> for that.
> As a person wanting to see Apache Bloodhound take off... yeah, I'm making a
> judgement call on whether that can better occur at the ASF instead of
> within the current Trac community. (fwiw, some of the ideas are
> non-starters for Trac, so the *only* solution is do it outside the core
> project).
> I'm saying that the *ASF* should avoid judging. We allow competition among
> projects. We accept projects with hard problems and low chances of success.
> We accept projects that some don't want us to. We should not judge. We
> should provide a home to communities that want to be here.

You realize, the paragraphs above are riddled with judgement calls?

Mr. Director, are causing undue confusion here by putting on your Director
hat to contradict the board.  That isn't healthy public forum conduct.

Either Ralph is grossly misinformed, or your are wildly out on a limb, or
(most likely) the whole subject matter is a whole lot more nuanced than either
of your posts are willing to concede.

I'd challenge this "we should not judge" assertion.  The incubator is charged
by the directors with "the acceptance and oversight of new products submitted
or proposed to become part of the Foundation" ... go back to 6. D. R2.

That involves a judgement.  When you get your fellow directors to accept an
amendment to state "the acceptance and oversight of new products contributed
to the Foundation" as the responsibility - then I can buy your reasoning that
we don't cast judgements (on any number of measures).


Folks, can we please find a better forum for religious "This is the ASF" debates
to occur?  And keep discussions non-toxic here on general@incubator?

Please remember that we point newcomers here to general@incubator and suggest
they follow that list to get a better understanding of what the ASF is.

These threads do not help to convey any clarity, and they only serve to confuse
our prospective contributors and potential, future members.  Particularly when
argued between directors.  Not suggesting that public debate is bad... but if
these can occur elsewhere, and -conclusions- then posted here to general@, it
would go a long ways to help newcomers orient to the philosophy and expectations
of the ASF as a whole.

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

View raw message