incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: [RT] Incubator Reorg
Date Wed, 03 Dec 2003 13:28:06 GMT

Sam Ruby wrote:

> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>>> 2) Suppose I write 50K lines of code and it lives on sourceforge for 
>>> a year.  Maven takes a liking to it and I contribute it (and in the 
>>> process am made a committer).  Clearly a software grant is required, 
>>> but is a PPMC needed or does the incubator need to be involved?
>> If the code will go in Maven a PPMC is not needed.
>> If the code will go in a subproject of Maven with mostly existing 
>> committers, a PPMC is not needed.
>> If the code will create a new community based mostly on external 
>> contributors, a PPMC is needed.
>> In essence, a PPMC is needed for new communities made of new 
>> committers, not for new codebases per se. In this case it's evident 
>> that the Incubator is needed.
> Two points.
> Clearly the incubator is needed in this scenario so that the software 
> grant can be independently audited.  But is a PPMC needed in order to 
> teach me "The Apache Way"?  I would have thought that my credentials 
> would have been established by now.  :-P


Well, as we have defined PPMC members coming from he Incubator PMC as 
last resort vetoers, they will not teach "The Apache Way".

It's all left to the Mentors, and that's you :-)

The PPMC is needed not because other people there teach something, but 
because it's existance alone makes it something that teaches itself.

> Second, what exactly is this "new community" notion that you are putting 
> forward?  Think carefully about your answer as the board does not 
> recognize any finer granularity of community than the project and the 
> mandate of the incubator was established by the board.

Here I use the term "community" in it's wider sense (group of people 
with common interests).

> I also didn't think that this is the type of notion that you wished to 
> encourage.  Note that the current trend is to make all sustained and 
> active committers to all projects members of the associated PMC - 
> witness the continued growth in size of the Jakarta PMC as well as the 
> number of full fledged projects spun off from same.

Correct. I was even pissed off by the fact that it was proceeding too 
slowly, so I can only agree.

> I maintain that if I were made an active committer in Maven by virtue of 
> this hypothetical donation (and therefore eligable to become a member of 
> the Maven PMC, perhaps immediately or perhaps after a few month delay), 
> that no PPMC would be neccessary or appropriate.

I have thought of this issue too, and it's bugging me.

Let's leave Geronimo aside for the moment and look at Lenya.

Lenya will become a sub-project of Cocoon. Or better, a sub-codebase of 
the same project. It's fair to assume that once incubation is finished, 
the Lenya codebase will go to the Cocoon PMC and that all Lenya 
committers will go in the Cocoon PMC.

Now, IIUC you suggest that in this case we don't need a PPMC.

Problem: the project is under the Incubator PMC that has to keep 
oversight. How can it do so effectively without being on the "Lenya" PMC?

Second problem: since the Project is not accepted in Apache, is it good 
to add Lenya developers to the Cocoon PMC?

So, it would seem that we have two solutions:

1 - add Lenya developers and Incubator members to the Cocoon PMC list,
     but not the PMC

2 - make a PPMC consisting of all the above

3 - have Lenya become an indipendent project, and not stay under Cocoon


Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

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

View raw message