Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of niall.pemberton@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.51 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CABD8fLUOxT71FoLDyA60Faebd4yS1-ovxAPKkruFjn9HNddp_g@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CABD8fLUOxT71FoLDyA60Faebd4yS1-ovxAPKkruFjn9HNddp_g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2013 01:33:21 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAPmHmDS7qCff9mkmUkQq2xaQ=EckTSbeG3_0OuODbCK69AGBwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: No more existing-TLP graduations (was: [PROPOSAL] Curator for the
 Apache Incubator)
From: Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
> I concur with Chris, and want to strengthen/meta the point. The Incubator
> should not be used for projects which are intended to become part of an
> existing TLP. The Incubator *creates* Apache-style communities. But... Stop.
>
> For these, we don't want a separate/new community. They are supposed to be
> *part of* the existing TLP. Thus, they have no business here. They should
> start within the target TLP.

The incubation of WebWork into Struts is an example where there was an
existing project outside the ASF with an existing bunch of developers
that were not ASF committers. The point of going through the incubator
was for the communities to merge. I guess at the time we could have
just given comitt access to all WebWork devs - but most of us on the
Struts project didn't know them. Is that what you're proposing should
happen in this scenario?

Niall


> I'd like to suggest two changes:
>
> 1) Incubation is for new TLPs only. Turn off the "graduate-into-TLP" option.
>
> 2) Move the "short form" IP clearance to Legal Affairs, to clarify that
> we're only talking IP, rather than other concerns.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
> On Feb 26, 2013 4:19 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hi Luciano,
>>
>> On 2/26/13 12:03 PM, "Luciano Resende" <luckbr1975@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >+1, We don't need to discuss exit criteria before entering incubation.
>>
>> Actually we do and I can. Else I'm pretty useless on the IPMC.
>>
>> I just went through an experience where my objection/VOTE didn't really
>> mean anything in a situation that I didn't think was correct (see
>> HCatalog/Hive). I will be darned sure to discuss exit criteria now as I
>> wish I would have paid attention and done so then, would have saved hassle
>> all around.
>>
>>
>> >And if the Zookeeper PMC wants to adopt Curator as part of the
>> >Zookeeper project (see distinction from sub-project language, which is
>> >what the Board does not favor),
>> >they can work with the community and
>> >do it....
>>
>> Define "working with the community".
>>
>> My definition of that doesn't include entering the Incubator.
>>
>> My definition of that means, Pat or someone else on the ZK PMC starts
>> getting Curator patches and/or committing them and Jordan or Jay become
>> Committers/PMC members on ZK because of those contributions (and have
>> their ICLAs on file, etc.)
>>
>>
>> >Having said that, the exit criteria should really be an
>> >option instead of being dictated.
>>
>> I'm questioning "graduation" to an existing TLP (and not as a new one) as
>> a valid exit criteria of the Incubator. I don't think it makes sense.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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