incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Franklin, Matthew B." <mfrank...@mitre.org>
Subject Re: Sub-projects - when are they acceptable? (was Re: [VOTE] Graduate Nuvem as a sub-project under Apache Tuscany)
Date Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:07:27 GMT
On 11/21/12 7:26 AM, "Benson Margulies" <bimargulies@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Ross Gardler
><rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> On 21 November 2012 10:36, Bertrand Delacretaz
>><bdelacretaz@apache.org>wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>> <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>> > ...sub-"products", or the ability for a PMC to release multiple
>>> "products", like e.g.,
>>> > like Lucene does now (Lucene-Java is a product; Solr is a product;
>>> PyLucene is a product),
>>> > that works b/c the sets of individuals that make up those interested
>>>in
>>> the sub "products" are
>>> > not separate communities, they just release different portions of the
>>> software that they scratch
>>> > their itch on....
>>>
>>> Agreed, that's what I meant - a PMC that groups multiple communities
>>> is not good, whereas one that oversees several products is fine.
>>>
>>
>> +1 this is a good way of restating my intention too.
>>
>> Seems we have lots of agreement so far.
>
>So, permit me to ask another, related, question. It seems to me that
>the IPMC is concerned with the fact that a project is ready to leave,
>but not so much which where it is going. A proposal to form a new TLP
>is, I think, a straightforward question to the board, and the IPMC's
>action is to make a recommendation to the board.
>
>A proposal to be integrated into an existing project is, I think,
>within the authority of the existing product's PMC. If Project A
>wishes to invite the members of Podling B to join and integrate their
>code, then this looks to me like it could just happen without any
>approval in advance from the board or even the IPMC. Voting in
>committers is a PMC task, voting in PMC members is a PMC task with
>board lazy approval, and copying (ip-cleared) code from one place in
>ASF source control to another is a PMC task.
>
>I think that IPMC graduation votes in this case are a nice thing, but
>it seems by this logic that they are not necessary.
>
>Does this make sense?

I think your statement makes sense, but I see the votes as a way for IPMC
members to assert that they believe all due diligence in IP clearance has
been performed and that a sanity check has been done as to whether or not
the podling is to be fully integrated into the PMC of the target project.
>From this perspective the Incubator serves to provide a convenience to the
target PMC in regards to releasability of code they are assuming and as a
foundation preventative measure for ensuring we don't end up with massive,
disconnected umbrellas comprised of former incubator podlings.

>
>
>>
>> Ross
>>
>>
>>>
>>> -Bertrand
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
>> Programme Leader (Open Development)
>> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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