community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <>
Subject Re: How can we support a faster release cadence?
Date Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:53:47 GMT
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Henri Yandell <> wrote:

> If we view Apache as a certification of a certain style of quality, then
> that fits nicely with my suggestion that anyone wanting a faster cadence
> should go do such under their own name/brand


> and roll the changes up to the mainline for certification.

Not sure what "certification" means here.  Submitting changes upstream is
usually a good idea so that the fork can reduce its long-term development
efforts.  As a bonus, improvements are shared with the wider upstream
community, so it's a win-win.

> But the suggestion from Doug is that the act of a subset of the PMC doing
> this would create confusion (I assume that's the murky effect) and be bad.

If that subset shares no other common legal entity but Apache then it could
be hard to distinguish from Apache.  If it's clearly the non-Apache effort
of a single individual or corporation then there should be no confusion.
 Perhaps a set of individuals or corporations could somehow make it clear
that they're assuming legal responsibilities and absolve Apache.  What I
wanted to discourage is a (subset of) a PMC thinking they can bypass Apache
policy by working outside of Apache when they don't like Apache policy and
inside when they do.  I thought your suggestion might be read as
encouraging that, even if it's not what you intended, so I sought to
clarify things.  Does that make sense?  Do you disagree?


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