incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: Websites at
Date Mon, 07 Dec 2015 04:18:55 GMT
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Niall Pemberton
<> wrote:

>> > Attached a patch to:
>> > 1. change from poding.i.a.o to poding.a.o
>> > 2. Require the incubator logo and that it be prominent

Thanks, Niall.

For the time being, I'm -1 and going to play devil's advocate, but I'm willing
to be persuaded.


OK, now the can of worms opens up...

Compliance with the existing podling website branding requirements is poor[1].
What good is adding another requirement for people to ignore[2]?

If the website is at ``, then why not the mailing lists,

Some podlings find labeling releases "incubating" inconvenient for both
techncical and social reasons.  Why not dispense with that requirement as

Some podlings find the requirement to brand themselves as "incubating"
inconvenient for marketing materials (including the podling website) because
the public may interpret it as implying an immature codebase.  Arguably, it
will help our podlings succeed if we simply stop differentiating them from
TLPs.  So why do we distinguish podlings from TLPs at all?

Finally, to what extent does the Incubator have the responsibility to involve
other entities at Apache (e.g. Marketing, Brand Management, Board) in
decisions to weaken podling branding requirements?

My perspective on all these questions is that a balance has been struck
between inconvenience to the podling, the right of the the general public to
know that a podling is incubating (and thus may put out releases that don't
adhere to all aspects of Apache policy, may not have a mature community,
etc.), and the reputatation of the Foundation.  And therefore, reducing
inconvenience to the podling, while a worthy goal, is not sufficient
justification on its own to disrupt that balance.

Better to seek out other ways to reduce podling inconvenience -- e.g. is it
possible to carve out some exception for Geode templates?

Marvin Humphrey

[2] This is a tangential point, but I'm not enthused about replacing a
    faceless technical mechanism with a policy that requires individuals to
    serve as enforcers.  I think that injects a negative dynamic into the

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message