incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Bayer <andrew.ba...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: A question: Is it alright to say no to potential podlings?
Date Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:32:43 GMT
But - and I wanna be very clear that this is a hypothetical - if I were to
still have significant concerns (either ones that weren't addressed in the
DISCUSS thread or I missed the DISCUSS thread, etc), it'd still be socially
permissible (not just procedurally permissible) to -1 a VOTE? I ask 'cos,
well, I'm easily cowed by social pressure on this sort of thing, so bucking
the herd isn't easy. If I feel that a potential podling has reached VOTE
stage while still having issues that in my mind make it a bad candidate to
enter the Incubator, I want to be sure I can still -1 it without being
turned into a pariah in the process. =)

(and again - this is purely hypothetical)

A.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:

> Yeah, that's just it...
>
> If a project gets to the 'vote for Incubation' phase, there's
> a real good chance that all the non-viable and non-acceptable
> proposals have either been modified or simply rejected before
> it even gets that far.
>
> > On Oct 13, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It is very common for a project as initially proposed to be rejected
> during
> > initial champion counseling or during discussion.
> >
> > If problematic aspects are mitigated or mentors sign up for extra care,
> > this rarely results in a complete stop of the incubation, however.
> >
> > As with all Apache processes, things rarely go to a vote until the
> outcome
> > is already assured so looking for failed votes isn't very productive.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:22 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>> On Oct 13, 2015, at 3:59 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacretaz@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Bayer <andrew.bayer@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> ...Can we think of some examples in recent years of potential podlings
> >> getting
> >>>> to the point of a serious DISCUSS thread but not making it to a
> vote?..
> >>>
> >>> I don't have such an example, but it might also just be because we say
> >>> no earlier.
> >>>
> >>>> ...Is it culturally acceptable for IPMC members to vote no?...
> >>>
> >>> Definitely.
> >>>
> >>>> ...and what criteria would make it acceptable to vote no?...
> >>>
> >>> Off the top of my head I'd say:
> >>> 1) Not enough experienced mentors
> >>> 2) Projected Infrastructure costs too high
> >>> 3) Project needs more time outside of the ASF to start building a
> >> community
> >>> 4) Project doesn't have a concrete enough codebase to get started
> >>> 5) Incomplete proposal, or something in it that makes us think the
> >>> project will never graduate
> >>>
> >>> We usually detect 3) and 4) in the discussion stages, and 4) is not
> >>> absolute, there can be interesting exceptions.
> >>
> >> 6) License incompatibility... ie, they want to use LGPL instead of ALv2
> >>   for example.
> >> 7) Governance incompatibility... want to remain a BDFL, etc.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message