Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 10DBAB76D for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 27813 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jan 2012 22:15:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27630 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jan 2012 22:15:07 -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 27622 invoked by uid 99); 10 Jan 2012 22:15:06 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:15:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [72.167.82.89] (HELO p3plsmtpa01-09.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) (72.167.82.89) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:14:59 +0000 Received: (qmail 7003 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2012 22:14:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (76.252.112.72) by p3plsmtpa01-09.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (72.167.82.89) with ESMTP; 10 Jan 2012 22:14:37 -0000 Message-ID: <4F0CB848.1030303@rowe-clan.net> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:14:32 -0600 From: "William A. Rowe Jr." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: general@incubator.apache.org CC: Jukka Zitting Subject: Re: Q. Forks without concensus?; A. anytime / depends / never without agreement References: <10AD3D3E-B041-4144-90D5-A1E563A5087B@gbiv.com> <4F0C9662.6030107@rowe-clan.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/10/2012 3:50 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: > > The IPMC is perfectly capable (in its own sometimes messy way) to deal > with this issue. In fact the board has explicitly delegated the > responsibility of "acceptance and oversight of new products submitted > or proposed to become part of the Foundation" to the IPMC. Not if there is a foundation-wide policy, we aren't. The IPMC can no more violate our rules on accepting forks than it can accept GPL'ed projects, without the board revisiting policy. This is not G v. R arguing we should or shouldn't accept forks, this is G v. R arguing that a foundation-wide policy already exists. Let the board square it up. If the answer is 'depends', then you are right, incubator would have been the committee to weight those conditions. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org