Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <noel@devtech.com>
To: <general@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: RE: several messages
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 10:58:29 -0400
Message-ID: <NBBBJGEAGJAKLIDBKJOPIEBFKOAB.noel@devtech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <20040714020215.U682@fez.hyperreal.org>

Brian Behlendorf wrote:
>>> On the other hand, I don't want corporations to view Apache as a
"channel"
>>> for broader adoption of a new standard they've invented, a way to get a
PR
>>> bang to help the stock price, etc.
>>
>> i do not think that is going to happen.
>
> It's happened already, Ken.
>
> it's interesting to note that those incubator projects that consist of
> code from larger companies and associated with a big-bang PR tend to not
> see as much participation in the incubator as the more grass-roots
> proposals like Geronimo or the more modest launches like XMLBeans.  So
> I'm trying to explore why, and how can we improve.

Ok, this is a different issue.  I share your concern and desire for a
solution.  I am not sure which projects you have in mind, but I can think of
two projects on my radar that might fit the bill.  One is an older one that
is not from a big company, and is seemingly and finally starting to get
squared away.  The other one is a recent submission that more closely fits
your description, and concerns have been raised to the contributor about it.
However, the source for that has been available in the public eye, so the
proposed litmus test would not have corrected the problem.  I think we're
all open to suggestions that would.

> when I get calls out of the blue from companies who (paraphrased,
> exaggerated slightly) "want to open-source this prototype legacy
> code we wrote (that we couldn't build a business around) through
> Apache so we can get a PR boost for our upcoming [IPO/product
> release/funding announcement/etc]."

I'll go back to the Community aspect.  I would hope that such a proposal
would not be of interest, but I'm concerned about what ASF Members want to
incubate.

The benefit to the contributor is not a criteria, although if we've decided
that a project is a good fit, I don't mind the mutual benefit of a splash.
If we have a project coming from a corporation with a bunch of developers,
we want to build an independent community for it.  Having a splash can help
US, too, since it can be used to draw in new contributors.  And it gives us
a chance to work with, and see how, the new community handles expanding its
committer base.

> Like many conversations in the ASF these days the responses strike
> me more as "here's where you're wrong" rather than a constructive
> discussion

I'm sorry you feel that way.  For myself, I considered your proposal, and
many of the responses..  As a general thing, I would like to see the code.
My objection was to it as a mandate, which is why I did point out the
reasons why I did not think it made sense as a mandate.  I am very
interested in what things we can do to prevent abuse of the ASF Incubator.

	--- Noel


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