community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <cutt...@apache.org>
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 <henri@yandell.org> 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
>

+1


> 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?

Doug

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