incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stian Soiland-Reyes <>
Subject Re: [pTLP] Apache Commons sub-mailing lists discussion
Date Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:46:19 GMT
Right - then Incubator guidance really needs updated, because reading
it, it sounds like using the IPMC as a sponsor is a special case for
when you really could not find a sponsor project. Going over the list
of incubating project this hasn't really been the case this decade
except for a couple of clear sub-projects. even
links to exactly to the umbrella project Jakarta.

I removed the confusing Jakarta reference and have updated it slightly
- see staging:

.. but more work is needed as it still describes the process as
normally sending proposals directly to the champion project, where
IPMC submission is a special case. So I agree with you that it is now
the other way around. (Also please remember people won't know jargon
like "IPMC" at this stage..)

I added these paragraphs to help explain what the champion will help
you with before you write and submit a proposal - we found that very
useful for our proposal and for understanding what Apache and "Apache
Way" really would mean for us and our project.

> Simply email that person directly (e.g., see the committer list to
find the username), describe informally yourselves and your project, and ask kindly if she
would be willing to act as your Champion for your project within the Apache incubator. Remember
that all Apache Committers and Members are volunteers with limited spare time, but you will
hopefully find that the person is honoured by your request to be a Champion and sees a potential
for your project as a future Apache project.

> Once you have found an eligible person who is willing to act as Champion, you can use
this person to help you determine if and how your proposal can fit within the ASF, and if
the "Apache Way" of open development would be right for your project. This might happen over
a series of emails, telephone calls or online chat sessions, and should cover any practical
concerns such as project infrastructure (e.g. mailing lists, web, source code repositories,
issue tracker, wiki) but also the implications of licensing, governance and Intellectual Property

I have not updated from section "Acceptance"  and beyond to make
Incubator as Champion the default.

- any takers? :)

Or should larger parts of Process_Description.html be removed as it is
also covered by the much nicer  (which on the other
hand doesn't say much about where you find a Champion and Sponsor).

On 16 January 2015 at 16:21, Benson Margulies <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <> wrote:
>> Relating to IncubatorV2 and pTLP proposals - on Apache Commons I seem
>> to have spurred a discussion about making sub-mailing lists (And thus
>> forming sub-communities) - but keep the formalities on the general
>> list.
>> (email below)
>> My slight concern (even though I would benefit from the proposal :))
>> is that this is in danger of forming a "mini incubator" with less
>> clear guidance and follow-up:
>> The pTLP proposal has not mentioned what would be the process for
>> projects with a sponsor different from Incubator (e.g. which don't
>> aspire to become TLPs) - presumably they would usually have mentors
>> from and report to the parent project?
> Well, the idea of non-incubator sponsors seems to me to have been a
> dead letter for years. As of now, the board's expectation is that all
> incubating projects are supervised by the IPMC. While the proposal
> template still has a slot for sponsor, it does not mean anything in
> practice. It's the IPMC and only the IPMC that accepts new projects,
> and then supervises them.
> In the very remote case that my version of the pTLP proposal goes
> anywhere, the board would, of course, have the option of passing a
> resolution to establish a pTLP without prior vetting by the Incubator
> Committee.
> As for subcommunities, I reference the very complex process of a few
> years back of _getting rid of_ 'umbrella projects.'
>> I don't see any proposals with "Apache Commons" as the sponsor at
>> .. is that because Commons already have a lightweight entry path with
>> its sandbox?
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Gilles <>
>> Date: 16 January 2015 at 00:47
>> Subject: [ALL] Too much traffic on the "dev" ML
>> To: Commons Developers List <>
>> Hi.
>> In the discussion that started about RDF, it seems that the
>> traffic volume is a stumbling block.
>> [For some time now, it has been a growing nuisance, and the
>> usual dismissal about filters won't change the fact: Setting
>> up a filter that will redirect stuff to /dev/null is a waste
>> of bandwidth.]
>> If different ML are created, people interested in everything
>> can subscribe _once_, and nothing will change for them.
>> For people who spend a lot of time just deleting dozens messages
>> and notifications a day, it will be a relief.
>> Maintaining community conversation is not a problem: just
>> create an "" ML for things that
>> need input form a larger audience (like votes).
>> Best regards,
>> Gilles
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> Apache Taverna (incubating)
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)

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

View raw message