incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <>
Subject Re: Incubator structure (was Re: Vote on personal matters: majority vote vs consensus)
Date Wed, 03 Apr 2013 13:41:38 GMT
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Noah Slater <> wrote:

> Thanks for the clarification, Ant. Is the documentation ignored? Whenever I
> look through it, it seems like the problem is that it is incomplete and
> confusing. It's hardly a wonder people disagree. ;) (This is just a bit of
> rhetoric. I hardly mean to imply the documentation is responsible for the
> whole problem...)
Yep I don't know that "ignored" is the best word, and i agree the doc can
be incomplete and confusing. For another example take the minimum
graduation requirements documented on the policy page:

"The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are
at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or
entity that is vital to the success of the project)"
- http://incubator.apache

That seems reasonably clear. Based on that policy we have people saying a
poddling can't graduate yet because they don't have three independent
committers. Or maybe they do have three committers listed but some haven't
been active for ages. How long is ages though? Or what is active - actually
committing something or is the odd email enough? Or what about if we think
they would vote in a new person if someone came along in the future, maybe
thats enough? Or how about if some of the mentors agree to stick around on
the new PMC to make up the numbers? All of those things get debated. Not so
long ago we had a "what to do with small slow poddlings" debate and a
couple of small poddlings were allowed to graduate anyway despite not quite
meeting that minimum requirement, then just a little while later Chuwka in
a very similar state was nearly retired.


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