incubator-cvs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Apache Wiki <>
Subject [Incubator Wiki] Update of "AlternativeIncubatorAnalysis" by BensonMargulies
Date Sat, 04 Feb 2012 17:07:52 GMT
Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Incubator Wiki" for change notification.

The "AlternativeIncubatorAnalysis" page has been changed by BensonMargulies:

  I think that the board process in this area deserves another moment's thought. If a brand-new
project elects its first new PMC member, does the board really want to rubber-stamp it with
the usual ACK process? I hope not. I hope that the board wants at least one member to see
some evidence to support the nomination. Does the board really want to be taking this time?
Or would the board prefer a small IPMC to persist for this purpose?
  = Areas of responsibility as part of this proposal =
  ||<tablewidth="962px" tableheight="187px"style="font-weight:bold;">Task ||<style="font-weight:bold;">Current
Responsibility ||<style="font-weight:bold;">Revised Responsibility ||
- ||Binding VOTEs on podling releases ||IPMC||Now in the hands of all incoming projects. ||
- ||Binding VOTEs on podling new committers ||IPMC||Now in the hands of all incoming projects
+ ||IP Clearance Supervision||IPMC||IPMC ||
+ ||Binding VOTEs on podling releases (note 1)||IPMC||IPMC||
+ ||Binding VOTEs on probationary project releases ||IPMC||PMC ||
+ ||Binding VOTEs on podling new committers (note 2)||IPMC||IPMC ||
+ ||Binding VOTEs on probationary project new committers ||IPMC||PMC ||
  ||Binding VOTEs on incoming projects ||IPMC||IPMC||
  ||Production and dissemination of Incubator documentation ||IPMC||IPMC ||
  ||[DISCUSS], [PROPOSAL] and [VOTE] for new incoming projects ||general@incubator||general@incubator||
@@ -73, +76 @@

  ||Fixes problems with the mentoring process ||No one||IPMC||
  ||Maintaining the standards with respect to IP management? ||IPMC/Legal||IPMC/Legal||
+ == Notes ==
+ Note 1: It's hard to see why a project in this scheme would end up releasing more than once
before moving out of the incubator's supervision.
+ Note 2: I would expect that the typical process would be to leave the incubator before adding
any new people, but this allows for the possibility.
+ = Are We Barking Up The Right Organizational Tree Here? =
+ One of Bill Rowe's email messages emphasized the fact that this is all about a proposal
to the board to change how the foundation adopts new projects. This could lead to a further
thought: Assuming continued success, how will the Board supervise 100 projects? And would
there be a natural variation on one proposal or the other that fits into a scaled supervision

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

View raw message