incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: Incubator, or "Incubation"?
Date Thu, 02 Feb 2012 02:38:59 GMT
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 21:22, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<> wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> On Feb 1, 2012, at 3:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>  VP Project Incubation
>> works with those Champions.  Much like the foundation-wide security@a.o team
>> works with all the individual projects as a resource, but isn't responsible
>> for the oversight of individual project security defects.
> Yeah, I get what you're saying. You say the VP Incubator is a resource, but to me
> the role is the head of a committee that just adds extra burden and overhead to
> what should inherently be distributed and decentralized.
>> I don't see this working without an appointed coordinator.
> I do :) just with the coordinating living within the project, just like TLPs,
> and that's the Champion/VP of the podling.

This proposal creates a differentiation between "normal" TLPs and
"incubating" TLPs. The incubating TLPs have extra restrictions on them
(branding, releases, etc), and they need extra tracking to determine
whether they are ready to graduate. I can easily see a small group of
people maintaining that overall status and recommendation to graduate.
I can see this group shepherding the initial incubating-TLP resolution
to the Board. (a graduation resolution, if needed, could easily be
handled by the TLP itself by graduation time)

Mailing lists need somebody to "own" them, too, or they end up in a
weird state. This new-fangled Incubator group would be the owner of
the general@ list where proposals come in and are discussed.

The VP of an incubating-TLP has ASF experience, but is otherwise "just
another peer on the PMC" and is the liaison with the Board. I'm not
sure that it makes sense to give them these "extra burden[s]" that
you're talking about. Decentralization is good, but I concur with
Bill's analogy to security@ -- a group that helps to start and track
the incubation status of some of our TLPs.

By the time a TLP is ready to graduate, they might be self-aware
enough to self-certify, but I'd be more comfortable with an Incubator
group doing the review and recommendation.

All this said, I can see an argument to combine this "Incubation"
function/operations with ComDev. Certainly, the latter will have all
the education resources. The question is whether the execution is
distinct or rolled into ComDev.


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

View raw message