Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39889 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2009 10:20:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Jun 2009 10:20:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 62355 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jun 2009 10:20:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 62173 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jun 2009 10:20:16 -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 62163 invoked by uid 99); 15 Jun 2009 10:20:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:20:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [202.60.90.242] (HELO enterprise.16degrees.com.au) (202.60.90.242) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:20:05 +0000 Received: from developer (CPE-121-215-243-70.static.qld.bigpond.net.au [121.215.243.70]) by enterprise.16degrees.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2BCF872828 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:19:40 +1000 (EST) From: "Gavin" To: References: <4A2F8544.6010600@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Bypassing Incubator Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:19:35 +1000 Message-ID: <02FE219978C84680987DA937D63157B8@developer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Thread-Index: Acntb/hRv28zpn/ATreN4Ki9nccY4wAMetEQ X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090614-0, 14/06/2009), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com] > Sent: Monday, 15 June 2009 2:15 PM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: Bypassing Incubator > > Tim Ellison wrote: > > Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > > 1. Any substantial codebase needs at least IP Clearance in Incubator, > > > which is effectively just a record of where/when/how it came from, and > > > an opportunity for Incubator PMC members to have a look and make sure > > > that there is no flagrant IP issues. > > > I never understood this part. Why is the Incubator PMC any more > > qualified to decide if incoming code contains a "fragrant IP issue" > > than the destination TLP PMC? After all, the TLP PMC are doing that > > check continuously for the day to day contributions received. > > And they, the PMC responsible for clearing the IP, must record that > clearance in the Incubator, which was designated by the Board as the > repository for all of those IP clearance documents. That fact that there > are additional eyes is a bonus. > > --- Noel > Ok, so thanks everyone for your replies/clarifications. The cause of my question and confusion was I saw a request on Infra Jira for a mailing list and other infrastructure to be created for a Lucene Sub-Project OpenRelevance[1]. So, now I get that is quite alright to do that. The only question remains is that of IP clearance. I haven't had time to take a closer look as of yet. Is that part of Incubators role, to police around the whole of the ASF projects looking for IP violations and stuff that stinks of 'hey that should come through Incubator' , or is not the job of Incubator because it has never touched Incubator so is someone elses job to look into if everything is kosha or otherwise ? Thanks Gav... [1] - URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2086 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org