Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 79940 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2006 12:40:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Mar 2006 12:40:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 84758 invoked by uid 500); 18 Mar 2006 12:39:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 84713 invoked by uid 500); 18 Mar 2006 12:39:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 84702 invoked by uid 99); 18 Mar 2006 12:39:56 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Mar 2006 04:39:56 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [66.93.240.135] (HELO Mail.MeepZor.Info) (66.93.240.135) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Mar 2006 04:39:55 -0800 Received: from [192.168.23.5] (dsl093-240-231.ral1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.240.231]) by Mail.MeepZor.Info (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4994311C; Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:40:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <441BFF64.4030800@Golux.Com> Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:39:00 -0500 From: Rodent of Unusual Size Reply-To: coar@apache.org Organization: The Apache Software Foundation; Open Source Initiative User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: Incubations References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.92.1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ian.d.stewart@jpmchase.com wrote: > I personally didn't find anything sensational about lichtner's > e-mail. I think he raises a valid point. If the primary goal of > Apache Geronimo is to develope a quality, open source J2EE offering Yes. > as a means of advancing the interests of the ASF (whatever those may > be), as opposed to an end in and of itself Qualified no. Not advancing the interests of the ASF, but certainly not harming them either. > Similiarly, if the primary criteria for graduation from incubation is > indoctrination into "The ASF Way", and not code or community > maturity, this is something that needs to be communicated. If the > reverse is the case, this needs to be communicated as well. 'Indoctrinate' is one of those multi-valued words (compare 'sanction' as a verb with its use as a noun) that can lead to all sorts of strife when misconstrued, so let's be clear on how it's being used here to describe some of the Incubator's actions. - From http://tinyurl.com/kp3w8 (Merriam-Webster dictionary site): > 1 : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : TEACH Yes. > 2 : to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of > view, or principle No. The incubator isn't about trying to teach anyone how to write code, or to code in a particular way. Off the top of my head, it's about: 1. safeguarding legal rights and making sure people can legally do what they want to do with code; and 2. indoctrinating (first definition) newcomers to the ASF with a code of conduct, outlook, and procedural methods that will let people familiar with other ASF projects hit the ground running when they get involved with Geronimo, allow Geronimo participants to do likewise elsewhere at the ASF, and not reflect poorly on the ASF itself. Playgrounds are a common analogy, so let's try that. If the ASF is a playground, then the incubator is the monitor that makes sure newcomers play well with others. No hogging the toys, no bullying, no throwing things at people passing by, no moping in the corner. If someone new comes to the playground, and only knows one kid already there, the latter isn't allowed to *make* the newcomer play only with him. The new kid is introduced to the rest of the kids, and then things pretty much allowed to take their course. As I said, this is all off the top of my head, and the analogy may be incomplete or flawed beyond belief. :-) Assuming it *is* a reasonably accurate analogy for the incubator's purposes, does it seem reasonable or unreasonable? And how much do actual events and behaviours deviate from it? All IMHO. - -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBRBv/ZJrNPMCpn3XdAQLbPgP/Yd6Ezg0P2+fZ8lw6Ri8dDnacH0y5odHW vTIYAryoALmrjQw7e2qGAkLEF0tmJArglPKZXNpglHPcG8vIGrRRBvxdvlSjIb5/ Hi40TVg9U2+utXyzQvW01yT2g87Or+eJy3fn9y++tW9PeRqNUtGFmGJvuyNCnjKk YBt8MaQwz2E= =mHH3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----