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 bimargulies@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALEq1Z_qh7sVHzsFsi_UZOrhRbOCLL5K79jUVyRFbYxOdOTf1g@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+ULb+stHV3pCMEbwUo4eq-fM2afe_6_+tg+V5muvOKLSu6mSg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALEq1Z_qh7sVHzsFsi_UZOrhRbOCLL5K79jUVyRFbYxOdOTf1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 13:41:45 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CALhtWkfm+cNT73+JEoQ22NrNkMq0xeACszwkXqwStRiMJqPZtA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
From: Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Cc: board <board@apache.org>, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org>,
	Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ce09aa0486105107acdbe

--001a113ce09aa0486105107acdbe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting <cutting@apache.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rvs@apache.org> wrote:
> > At this point, I would like to open this document for soliciting as
> > wide a feedback as possible. I would like to especially request
> > attention of the ASF board members who asked for this type of
> > a document to be available.
>
> As a director, I still don't think the board needs to be involved in a
> pTLP's "graduation".  As far as I'm concerned, any "provisional"
> status is self-imposed by the PMC and can be removed at its pleasure.
> From the board's perspective it's either an ASF project or it's not,
> there's not a useful middle ground.  As a project it needs to provide
> reports, release according to accepted standards, operate openly, etc.
> It may be a young project, with a PMC dominated by old-timers who
> aren't responsible for much of the contribution, but I don't see why
> that requires a new formal status any more than we need a formal
> status for old, slow-moving projects that rarely release.
>
> Put directly, what does a pTLP's "graduation" change from the board's
> perspective?  How should it change the way we review the project's
> reports, etc.?  In short, why should we care about this label?  If a
> PMC wishes to call itself "blue" that's fine too, but we don't need a
> resolution when it decides to call itself "purple".
>

What's your view of 'incubation disclaimers'? The above paragraph makes
most sense to me if there are none for pTLPs.


>
> Doug
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

--001a113ce09aa0486105107acdbe--