incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache
Date Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:01:27 GMT
++1. I agree w/ Rich and Roman

> On Jun 23, 2019, at 11:25 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 3:31 PM Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com <mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com>>
wrote:
>> 
>> A couple of thoughts:
> 
> And a couple of thoughts on top of that.
> 
>> Podlings are not permitted to call themselves "Apache Foo" because they are
>> not yet full Apache projects.
> 
> Correct. The I way I see this thread is this: *when it comes to
> releases*, there's
> always been two camps in Incubator. One thinks that Incubator is a TLP just
> like Apache Commons that happens to produce release artifacts that have
> nothing in common (just like Apache Commons'  JXPath has very little to do
> with Compress and). A second camp thinks that Incubator is actually a special
> construct within a foundation (after all, if it was just like Apache Commons why
> would we make them put DISCLAIMER into release tarballs?).
> 
> It seems that David is closer to the 1st camp, and Rich and I are
> closer to the 2nd.
> 
> Looking at the community benefits, I really think we should acknowledge that
> Incubator is a special construct and optimize that special construct
> for a particular
> outcome: which is effectiveness of the graduation process.
> 
>> While in the incubator we should expect podlibgs to fail at the rules.
>> They're new to them and many of them feel arbitrary, even capricious, to
>> those coming in from outside. We should make it safe to fail until they are
>> ready to graduate. We should nurture them as long as they are moving
>> towards that goal.
> 
> Yup.
> 
>> I cannot disagree with your reading of our resolutions. But I wonder if
>> that reality is producing good citizen projects or a bunch of resentful
>> people following rules they don't understand or embrace because they know
>> they have to.
>> 
>> Zipkin is only the latest project which clearly didn't get it and has left
>> angry. I would rather a project realize that they don't fit and be able to
>> leave with their dignity without having also to leave hating what we stand
>> for.
>> 
>> I want our new graduates to love and understand the ASF not merely tolerate
>> it.
>> 
>> I want the incubator to respond to failure with gentle correction rather
>> than scoldings.
>> 
>> Specifically I think podlings should be able to produce releases that are
>> not asf complient and have them clearly labeled as such. Because they are
>> not TLPs yet and so cannot be held to the same standard. This must be
>> accompanied by a movement towards being a TLP, not some eternal incubation.
> 
> With my IPMC member hat on -- huge +1 to the above.
> 
> With my VP Legal hat on: I have no dog in this race. The IPMC needs to make
> a *business* (well, community in this case) decision and then we can work
> with a risk profile of that decision.
> 
> Like I said -- the decision to make is: 1st vs. 2nd camp.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org <mailto:general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org <mailto:general-help@incubator.apache.org>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message