Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <3F782063.1000805@Golux.Com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 08:06:59 -0400
From: Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.Coar@Golux.Com>
Organization: The Apache Software Foundation
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: The incubator and Poland
References: <BB9C7EA7.14395%acoliver@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <BB9C7EA7.14395%acoliver@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> So we're yack yacking about the incubator (again).

if it bothers you so much, you don't have to participate. :-)

> The incubator AFAICT
> replicated a tricameral vote.  To release you must have:

what do you mean by 'release'?  release software, or be released
from the incubator?  ah, reading ahead i see you mean the latter.

> 1. A PMC vote to accept it

no.  if there is no tlp sponsor, the board gets to create a new
tlp for the soon-to-be ex-podling.  if there is a tlp sponsor, it
gets to incorporate the graduated podling.  if it doesn't want
it, the board will likely ask other projeccts if they want to
adopt it, or create a new tlp for it.

> 2. The committers of the project vote that they're ready to leave

not a requirement, but almost certain to happen. :-)

> 3. The incubator PMC vote to let them out.

yes.

so, only one vote, not three.

> I would suppose #2 would the be the most vested group and #1 be the second
> most (substituted for the board in the top level situation)... I'd suppose
> #3 would be the least vested group.

your suppositions would be wrong imnsho.  #3 is the most vested, since
nothing will happen without that vote.  since the podling doesn't really
need to vote to emerge, its vestedness (#2) doesn't apply.  and #1 doesn't
apply because when the incubator says the podling is ready to emerge, it
will emerge -- one way or another.

or am i misunderstanding what you mean by 'vested'?

> The point?  None, I just like pointing my finger childishly when someone
> does something silly (like create a tricameral voting system... pretty
> funny, spell check doesn't recognize it, though it finds bicameral)...

is it childish to point your finger at something that doesn't exist? :-D
-- 
#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"Millennium hand and shrimp!"


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