Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 95963 invoked from network); 15 Mar 2005 20:22:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Mar 2005 20:22:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 44782 invoked by uid 500); 15 Mar 2005 20:22:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 44493 invoked by uid 500); 15 Mar 2005 20:22:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 44456 invoked by uid 99); 15 Mar 2005 20:22:39 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of cliffschmidt@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.192 as permitted sender) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.192) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:22:38 -0800 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 50so2618560wri for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:22:37 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=YwNfhQVQveAMFmRNLCwMfTwsT6VQtgD3k6R0E7qFsMzE3xI1kH31uClGto5YMXfnnu8zIv862ofaBY4Tb29V8A9kQ/M6HPa64I92LH6A3+Sju++w1uQdKrDVuibAkvjarJWO6pzf50+10ih2TtRy56Qq2J5mjjzVXVmbgtjuINw= Received: by 10.54.15.2 with SMTP id 2mr1316700wro; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:22:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.13.44 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:22:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:22:36 -0800 From: Cliff Schmidt Reply-To: Cliff Schmidt To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Incubation, healthy communities, and the Apache brand (long) In-Reply-To: <42373249.1070700@bellsouth.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6.0.3.0.0.20050312163525.038648e8@mail.qos.ch> <6.0.3.0.0.20050314120929.03a47ed0@mail.qos.ch> <20050314034430.S64999@skutsje.san.webweaving.org> <6.0.3.0.0.20050314153300.03a46910@mail.qos.ch> <42371F9C.7010404@Golux.Com> <42373249.1070700@bellsouth.net> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Here are my $0.02 on the reasons for the incubation process: Thanks to those who came long before me (particularly the httpd folks), the Apache brand is incredibly strong. There are literally millions of users of Apache products who believe that they are making a good choice by simply building on something from Apache. This brand adds value to all ASF projects, which allows them to get increased exposure and hopefully continue to attract developers to do more great work here. However, as the number of projects at Apache grows, we are faced with a very difficult challenge of keeping that brand strong. Many of the users who decide to build their businesses on Apache products are doing so with the belief that the product will "be there tomorrow", which means that questions will be answered on the mailing lists, bugs will eventually get fixed, and the product will release future versions to keep up with the latest user requests (e.g. interoperability with the latest standard). This is why community is more important than code to Apache -- without a strong and diverse community we can't live up to these expectations. If development is driven solely by one person/vendor, Apache is taking a risk that personal/business changes won't cause all development to come to a halt. IMO, the purpose of incubation is to allow new projects to get familiar with the way things work at Apache, to ensure any legal issues are adequately addressed, and to build a diverse user and developer community that minimizes the brand risk of endorsing the project under the Apache name, which happens only after graduation. Over the last couple years, the Incubator community has tried to quantify the standard for an acceptable community. We have the 3+ committers rule (which really should be from different organizations -- a major reason for this rule is to allow a veto to prevent a single person/company from making a self-serving decision that isn't in the best interests of the overall community); we used to have a rule a year ago that no more than 50% of the committers could be from any one organization (which was both unnecessary and could be gamed by a single vendor if it was the only hard requirement). My personal belief (and as a single vote on the Incubator PMC) is that a project is ready for graduation when it appears to be an acceptable risk to the Apache brand. Ideally, this means that no single individual/company could irrevocably damage the project by walking away; however, if that's not quite the case but the project has grown and diversified its community and has demonstrated an open process that continues to invite others to participate, then it might be an acceptable risk. Cliff --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org