Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <42F8251E.9090403@steitz.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 20:38:06 -0700
From: Phil Steitz <phil@steitz.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: JDO2 Snapshots
References: 
 <59278FC0C48A994BABABD069571E45680BB39D84@orsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <59278FC0C48A994BABABD069571E45680BB39D84@orsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Dittert, Eric wrote:
>> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com] Sent: Monday,
>> August 08, 2005 6:40 PM
>> 
>> As I said, it is about balance.  The community that we most care
>> about during Incubation is the developer community, not the
>> end-user community. I could go so far as to say that a bit of
>> inconvenience for end-users is not a bad thing because we don't
>> want *widespread* adoption by end-users until the project completes
>> Incubation.  And we certainly want end-users to know what they are
>> getting into if/when they choose to adopt a project in the 
>> Incubator.
>> 
>> I have *never* seen strong user adoption listed as a criteria.  Not
>> once. Nor would I support it as a requirement.
>> 
> 
> 
> I don't have as much historical context as others on this discussion
> but here are a few (possibly na�ve) thoughts:
> 
> 1) If you discourage making releases while in incubation, aren't you
> effectively preventing projects that have, through whatever
> mechanism, already acquired a significant user base from entering the
> Apache fold (or at least making life much more difficult for them)?

Valid point here - good motivation for getting through incubation.  The 
problem is that we can't make apache releases until all the IP has been 
cleared and the project has become an apache project (see below).
> 
> 2) It seems that perhaps some people see widespread adoption as a
> good way to get more developers involved, and thus as a way to meet
> the community-building requirements.  Certainly it seems to me that
> the user-turned-contributor is part of the common vision/folklore of
> OSS.  Is there a subtle distinction of some kind that is being
> missed?

At the risk of attracting flames, I would like to ask out of curiosity 
what evidence we have that "release early" and "gain widespread adoption 
quickly" are indispensable prerequisites for successful *community* 
gestation. Consider maven, struts, geronimo, as examples of successful 
apache projects (from community standpoint at least ;-) that did not cut 
early releases. Has anyone ever gathered data on this?

> 3) If the point is to get projects out of incubation, aren't there
> better management techniques than restricting the ability to do
> releases?  It seems that you might be better off setting positive
> goals and demanding that they be met.

There are such goals:
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Exit+Requirements

IMHO, no community that has not met these requirements should be allowed 
to cut apache releases.

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


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