incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luciano Resende <>
Subject Re: Earned autonomy
Date Mon, 06 Feb 2012 04:00:01 GMT
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Ate Douma <> wrote:
> On 02/06/2012 01:41 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 01:26:47PM -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>> It might be worthwhile to require 3 ASF members on the initial release,
>>> 2 on the next, 1 on the following and then trust the committee to follow
>>> the established precedent.
>> +1
>> Instead of automatically decreasing the count, the device I'd suggest is
>> for
>> the ASF Members on the committee to vote to grant binding votes to
>> individual
>> contributors who they believe have demonstrated a thorough understanding
>> of
>> the Apache Way.
>> Release Managers would be prime candidates; given the challenge of getting
>> an
>> incubating release out the door, an RM will likely have acquired greater
>> expertise than many ASF PMC members who have been voted directly into TLP
>> PMCs.  Just being an RM might not be enough, but it would be left to the
>> judgment of the ASF Members / Mentors to vet and vote on candidates.
>> The canonical path towards project autonomy would thus be to make three
>> incubating releases with three different contributors serving as RM.

Agreed that we need to have supervision on the initial phase, and that
some type of gradual phasing is required before they can handle the
releases by themselves.

> What worries me a lot about the recent proposals, not only the text above,
> is that project autonomy seems to be measured foremost by just doing proper
> releases.
> To me, Apache == Community over code.
> Code is important, it is what we are all here for (too), but the 'Apache
> Way' and especially community development and a healthy diversity IMO are
> even more critical. And especially for reaching project autonomy: *that* IMO
> is what the Incubator is (or should be) about.

Code and Releases are things that the Foundation might have legal
liability, that's why I have some concerns about leaving it without
any supervision.

I also agreed with your point about community, and I think this is the
place where ComDev would get pluged in.

> Learning the 'tricks' and reasons of doing proper releases isn't easy, and
> for sure required. But a 'perfect' RM doesn't automatically make a 'perfect'
> Apache TLP PMC member in my book. Which has been discussed quite a lot as
> well last week.
> The thing I'm worried about with the 'radical/revolutionary proposals of
> creating Incubator projects as TLPs from the start, is that they they also
> start 'on their own', even with 3 Mentors on board.
> Meaning: there is no 'glue' or common community between individual
> 'incubator' TLPs anymore which can help them, with the help of (many more)
> experienced IPMC members, as well as fellow Incubator PPMC members, to learn
> the ropes.
> Beyond merely doing proper releases.
> I fully agree the current Incubator has its issues, but radically killing it
> off IMO will also kill off more than just those issues: it will also kill
> the Incubator community itself. Maybe ComDev can or actually then will have
> to take over, but we should be really careful before breaking something down
> without having a replacement 'safety net' in place.
> Ate

Yes, moving from one "Incubator" to "ComDev" will not really fix all
the issues... but it seems that consensus is being built on this

Luciano Resende

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message