incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@opendirective.com>
Subject Re: Actively retiring projects
Date Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:31:23 GMT
+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
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message