Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: softfail (athena.apache.org: transitioning domain of
 dennis.hamilton@acm.org does not designate 216.234.124.52 as permitted
 sender)
Reply-To: <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>
From: "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>
To: <general@incubator.apache.org>
References: 
 <CAEWfVJn0cqYR1Z8jLo-_cUWwC1h-E0JboaePFNXnK87ubnFyug@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAK2iWdSA9tALi9d1=4vCZH-W470fBa6jUaduXp74Zswou-K=wQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BY2PR03MB4900EB4AFC266EEC875FADE990C0@BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
	<CAAS6=7iyhVDaQ=Ac+TX2BUcn=k+pA377-BExUD+taaRZbTsa5A@mail.gmail.com>
	<B3004BC6-7B66-48E9-AD68-BCAE8D9976B2@toolazydogs.com>
 <CAEWfVJ=5dXd4cRqA7HXJ1cvrXoYzpokLPtQEHC1x3mc0MR236g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEWfVJ=5dXd4cRqA7HXJ1cvrXoYzpokLPtQEHC1x3mc0MR236g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [POLL] Using this list to discuss pTLP proposals, ok?
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:17:49 -0700
Organization: NuovoDoc
Message-ID: <00c001d06584$e8cdbc30$ba693490$@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: 
 AQJMjMn+F67AmdNci8Z+EDq6iyXd7gGPMujoAn24trkCKhl9rQMI9ra5Aq0YewGb0oIOMA==
Content-Language: en-us
Received-SPF: softfail (supercp.com: domain of transitioning
 dennis.hamilton@acm.org does not designate 75.165.123.152 as permitted
 sender)

Oh.  I confused myself.  The POLL is about the processing of proposals =
to create pTLPs, and I was thinking about the creation of procedures for =
the processing of proposals to create pTLPs.  I think the first is fine, =
right here where it has been. =20

It might be strange for a pTLP proposal to be refined and then =
acceptance to be voted (i.e., on a project definition to be forwarded to =
the board) on general-incubator.  I have lost track of the remit for =
IPMC though.

So,

+0.5 on using this list,=20

With some clear demarcation and agreement on forwarding of a =
recommendation to the Board possibly having quite a different procedure. =
 Determining that incubation is preferable might also be an exit from =
that procedure, although I think that would become known as the project =
proposal is worked on and reviewed.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@apache.org]=20
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 01:13
To: Incubator General
Subject: Re: [POLL] Using this list to discuss pTLP proposals, ok?

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> =
wrote:
> ...The mailing lists derive their power from being focused on specific =
topics....

I disagree, our mailing lists are focused on *communities*, not topics.

> ...With that said, pTLP and direct-to-TLP issues have no business =
being on the
> Incubator lists since they are not under the purvey of the =
Incubator....

I also disagree ;-)

The Incubator community, on which this list is focused, has experience
handling the formation of podlings and their graduation. Creating a
TLP without incubating shares a lot of steps and concerns which those
operations, so discussing that here makes perfect sense.

-Bertrand

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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