incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Subject Re: Actively retiring projects
Date Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:40:12 GMT
+1

On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Ross Gardler
<rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> On Jan 15, 2012 6:18 PM, "Joe Schaefer" <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I wish we could get past the whole idea that we are punishing
>> a podling by insisting that they take their work to say github
>> instead.  They probably can keep the name since we have no interest
>> in it ourselves.
>>
>> We maintain an open-door policy for new projects, and I think that
>> is a good thing that we should keep.  What we lack is a sensible
>> mechanism for reviewing longstanding projects in terms of their
>> projected future in this place.  We did NOT promise anyone free
>> project hosting, and if they want that there are lots of places
>> to get that.  We merely provide an opportunity that with a little
>> luck, hard work, and determination, they can join the ASF and
>> become an Apache project.  But they deserve an answer at some point.
>>
>>
>> Purgatory is not what we were designed to offer, never.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.mohammad@gmail.com>
>> > To: general@incubator.apache.org; antelder@apache.org
>> > Cc:
>> > Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 1:09 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Actively retiring projects
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:01 PM, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>  On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>  > Now to go back and answer Ant's question directly,
>> >>
>> >>  Sam, what you replied doesn't really answer my question directly. The
>> >>  issue with the long term poddlings which I know about is not that
>> >>  their reports are not read, they are in fact read so something else is
>> >>  wrong if there is in fact a problem at all. I'm sorry that you're
>> > not
>> >>  happy with how Kato went, as i said here [1] i expect that to be
>> >>  resolved shortly and they will have done that themselves rather than
>> >>  being pushed out by Incubator PMC which i think is a good outcome.
>> >>
>> >>  <big snip>
>> >>
>> >>  >
>> >>  > Speaking as an individual Director here, but we have a board meeting
>> >>  > in a few days and I can obtain an Official Word™ on the matter
if
>> >>  > that's what people here would like, but I'm highly confident
>> > that the
>> >>  > outcome (directed at the chair) will be something along the lines
of
>> >>  > "see to it that podling reports are adequately vetted before
>> >>  > forwarding them to the board"
>> >>  >
>> >>
>> >>  I'd prefer to have an official response from the board on if in fact
>> >>  it matters if incubation takes longer than a year. Podlings like Nuvem
>> >>  or Wink or Photark or Kato or which ever else are just small and slow,
>> >>  so what?
>> >>
>> >
>> > +1 about "... small and slow, so what?"
>> >
>> > It is true some podlings are just slow and small regarding attracting
>> *new*
>> > blood to the podling's community, but the community itself is active, and
>> > IMHO it is not fair to punish them for that.
>> >
>> > On the other hand we still need to answer the question "OK, so till when
>> we
>> > should keep them in the Incubator ?" which is a very valid question,
>> > honestly I don't have a definitive answer for that, but I would give a
>> lead
>> > to an answer/discussion in a form of a question
>> >
>> > "Is the Incubator the right place for such podlings ?"
>> >
>> > If the answer is *yes* then we should find a way to manage the increasing
>> > number of accepted podling into the incubator relative to the number of
>> > active/available mentors, and also we should keep a list of podlings
>> which
>> > are not small and they should be doing good and hence being in the
>> > Incubator for some long time indicates that there is something wrong.
>> >
>> > If the answer is No, then:
>> >   - We should ask them to retire, which is not fair IMHO as I mentioned
>> > above
>> >   - Or Can we create another level of incubtion like, which can be the
>> same
>> > as the normal Incubator but we can lessen down the number of initially
>> > assigned mentors to 1 and recommend one of the initial committers to
>> become
>> > an active Mentor, provided that they have shown that they adapted to the
>> > ASF rules very well. This is just a suggestion.
>> >
>> > Thoughts ?
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>  (and please note that there is no disrespect intended here. the ideas
>> >>  and suggestions in this thread and others recently do seem like good
>> >>  stuff to be trying, regardless of the age of a poddling)
>> >>
>> >>    ...ant
>> >>
>> >>  [1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/trurg7pnt5yk7tei
>> >>
>> >>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> >>  For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thanks
>> > - Mohammad Nour
>> > ----
>> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
>> > moving"
>> > - Albert Einstein
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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


Mime
View raw message