incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: ajax proposal?
Date Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:58:37 GMT
On Jan 25, 2006, at 12:24 AM, Raphaël Luta wrote:
>
> As far I can tell, what needs to happen to fully OSS AjaxTk
> is something like this:
> - cleanup the code/doc/install so that Tk can be consumed
>   by a public community

It seems to me that something that works in some cases but isn't  
fully developed as an end-user easy-to-use product is ideal to  
complete in the incubator.

> - rework a clear internal separation  between AjaxTk and
>   ZCS with different repos, dependency management, indep
>   release cycle, and so on...

Repository issues, build, test, separation of dependencies, etc. can  
be very repository-specific. If you build this infrastructure in  
source forge you would have to deal with similar but different issues  
here in Apache. Why require them to make two transitions?

> - adjust internal dev processes to deal with the public
>   infra (and possibly some early external dev)

IMHO this is a critical part of building a community.

> - start building a long term external community by
>   actively attracting new committers
>
> I would feel more comfortable if the first 3 steps would be
> done somewhere else before any incubation starts so that
> incubation can really focus on the last point.

Sorry, but I don't agree. The way the first 3 steps are handled will  
give the Apache community a good sense of whether this project "gets  
it" or not, and we might as well help them with the process sooner  
than later.

> Apache does not bring any value in the first 3 steps that you
> can't bring by yourself as an ASF member and the amount of
> work and risk of failure in those 3 first steps is IMO
> significant.

I'm not sure that I understand your point. Certainly "any" open  
source repository is a different environment from a closed source,  
but I don't see an argument for or against incubation in Apache.

> The benefit of such a 2 step process is that this gives
> you an actual public track record before incubation is
> decided and voids most concerns about incubation being a pure
> branding exercicse since a significant amount of work would
> already have been spent in making the AjaxTk OSS independantly
> of any Apache commitment.

I'd still say that there is significant breakage involved in taking a  
closed source through two migrations rather than one. I think we need  
to remain focused on the barrier to incubation as documented in the  
Apache policies and not try to create new processes on the fly.

To me the critical piece here is "donation". These folks have  
intellectual property that appears to be useful and they want to  
donate it to Apache. Due diligence is required to make sure that  
there are people in Apache who want to see it succeed (mentors,  
sponsors, champions, developers, users), and there are resources  
available to build a community here. But let's not put artificial  
barriers in their way. There are plenty of barriers once in incubation.

Craig
>
> -- 
> Raphaël Luta - raphael@apache.org
> Apache Portals - Enterprise Portal in Java
> http://portals.apache.org/

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message