On Saturday, August 9, 2003, at 03:46 AM, Vic Cekvenich wrote:

>
>> Keep your FUD to yourself -- it is not welcome here. Especially when you
>> have no facts.
>> -g
>
> I think this is beeing rushed, and the process looks diferent then the 
> process for Tapestry into incubator for example, where there was a public 
> vote; and I think Incubator had a process documemented someplace.

i think that there are a few differences (that should be noted for the 
record):

1. tapestry applied for entry to jakarta. there is a very high barrier 
which projects who wish to become part of jakarta have to pass. (if i 
understand correctly) geronimo is a board level initiative which will 
become a top level project.

2. tapestry lacked active support from apache members.

3. tapestry was the first.

FWIW i think that tapestry has become a stronger projects due to this 
baptism of fire. i also think that it's unfortunately that the incubation 
took so much energy that could probably have been more effectively spent 
elsewhere.

i do agree that the incubation process needs to be improved and documented.
  i also feel that it's important that all incubatees follow the same 
process (even though for some products this may just be a formality).

- robert


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org