Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 93626 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2004 10:08:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Jul 2004 10:08:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 85519 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jul 2004 10:08:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 85268 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jul 2004 10:08:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: no List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 85252 invoked by uid 99); 12 Jul 2004 10:08:00 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=10.0 tests=LINES_OF_YELLING X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [204.146.167.214] (HELO Boron.MeepZor.Com) (204.146.167.214) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 03:07:59 -0700 Received: from [192.168.23.5] (dsl093-240-231.ral1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.240.231]) (authenticated) by Boron.MeepZor.Com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i6CA7vw29832; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 06:07:58 -0400 Message-ID: <40F262F5.90009@Golux.Com> Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 06:07:49 -0400 From: Rodent of Unusual Size Organization: The Apache Software Foundation User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: proposal: modify incubation application process to require a reference to the code itself References: <20040708182619.D5762@fez.hyperreal.org> In-Reply-To: <20040708182619.D5762@fez.hyperreal.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.84.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Brian Behlendorf wrote: > It seems to me that any honest assessment of the merit of > accepting a proposal should include a look at the code itself, if only to > get a gut-check on how maintainable and evolveable that codebase might be > going forward. why? if the idea excites people but the code sucks, are we going to turn it down? > Many proposals have provided just such a link despite it > not being required. Requiring it would also avoid the situation where > someone says "if Apache approves it *then* I'll release the code". why do we want to avoid this situation? what business of it is ours if the submitter wants to entrust their baby to us and only to us? we should say no when given such an expression of confidence? - -- #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 Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBQPJi85rNPMCpn3XdAQGJbgQAse4g1psWSqcpA/3BdhKK4kRkt3SxIENt +iiOOmNSRe2FcIFqZEsE1OFzKp6IETWEyrRFy+Zqxn7pzHA6E+0RqczP1ZJE+r42 yVcQQfIPsvJe3RFDN460TL66now9FLFDAQbg+bmOLRErDEyMjr3vuOYijp6PRYC+ wspiBggzGwQ= =KZ8l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org