incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Gruno <>
Subject Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)
Date Sun, 26 Jul 2015 22:57:45 GMT

On 2015-07-26 10:56, jan i wrote:
> No that is an important service, on the other hand I also agree that the
> mentors should be guiding/running the podlings not general@
> Maybe we can find some middle ground.
> - Mentors "run" the podlings, can accept releases etc.
> - Mentors decide when a podlng can graduate (maybe with some form of, needs
> to accepted by all mentors of the project)
> - Any release must be announced (not voted) on general@, so that people
> like you have a chance of controlling it just like today.
> I think this would make incubator a lot more efficient, reduce our inboxes,
> and give us spare time to concentrate on other things.
> rgds
> jan i.
This is somewhat similar to the 2013 alternate release policy we have, 
whereby the first release has to do the initial IPMC clearance vote, but 
subsequent releases only need the mentors' approval. I believe our 
current policy is sound and has proven itself effective, as you can see 
by the many times a new podling's release has been caught by the "policy 
watch dogs" we have in the IPMC that specialize in reviewing material 
that is to be released.

Optionally, if we aim to 'save space in our inboxes', we could generate 
a new group of people on a specific ML designed for initial release 
verification, and all _first releases_ would go through that list and 
have things checked, while only sending a NOTICE to the general 
incubator list on successfully released software.

I do not, however, think we should just scrap the current rule of having 
the outside judge the initial release, as it has been shown, time after 
time, that it really does help to have this external review.

With regards,

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

View raw message