incubator-lucy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <>
Subject Re: Fwd: new projects bypassing incubator
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2006 21:48:05 GMT
[I don't appear to be on the incubator PMC mailing list, so I don't know 
what's been said about this there besides the message Erik forwarded 

The Lucy project will be all-new code.  I explained the importance of 
this to David and Marvin before we proposed the project.  We are not 
attempting to bypass the incubator.  I am familiar with the incubator 
and understand and support its purpose.

David and Marvin are new committers, added to start this project. 
Marvin and David were both active members of the Apache Lucene community 
before this, as well as implementors of respected non-Apache ports of 
Lucene to Perl and Ruby.


Erik Hatcher wrote:
> FYI, the Lucy project is being discussed in the Incubator PMC.
> Doug, Dave, and/or Marvin should probably jump in on this conversation.
>     Erik
> Begin forwarded message:
>> From: Justin Erenkrantz <>
>> Date: June 22, 2006 8:58:48 AM EDT
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: new projects bypassing incubator
>> Reply-To:
>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 08:11:49AM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
>>> On 6/22/06, Noel J. Bergman <> wrote:
>>>> Justin,
>>>> re:
>>>> Is this a new project starting within Lucene, or an import?  Or 
>>>> something
>>>> grey in the middle?  Perhaps Doug Cutting can give us more details.
>>>> Incubation is not required, as I understand it, for projects 
>>>> originating
>>>> within the ASF.  For example, JAMES has a new internal project called
>>>> Postage, which is our mail server test suite, written entirely by our
>>>> Committers.
>>>> In all likelihood, we should do more about promoting new projects that
>>>> originate within the ASF, but are we saying that they should go through
>>>> Incubation?
>>> I don't see why incubation would be required for that kind of thing.
>>> It's new code, so there shouldn't be any IP issues, and it's an
>>> existing community, so there shouldn't be any "this is how we do
>>> things" issues.
>>> Assuming that both of those assumptions are true, then I don't see
>>> what the incubator's involvement would be.
>> The phrase that sends up a flag for me in the Lucy website was:
>> "KinoSearch's back end will serve as a template"
>> That sounds like a code import to me.  But, if I'm wrong, then I agree 
>> and I
>> don't see why the Incubator needs to be involved...
>> *shrug*  -- justin
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message