On 06/14/2010 05:16 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> I'm having a hard time wrapping my head arround the idea of Lucy moving
> from the Lucene TLP to the Incubator TLP. It probably would have made
> sense for Lucy start in the Incubator years ago, but I'm not really sure
> what value that would add now given the status quo. Would the Incubator
> TLP be in a better position to help build the Lucy community then the
> Lucene TLP? Would it have more visibility then it does now? Would the
> Incubator PMC even *accept* Lucy since there are no IP issues, and the
> existing committers/community are allready ASF commiters/community?
I think the question to ask first is whether the Lucene PMC is willing
to continue incubating Lucy. The Lucene PMC must either commit to
providing some oversight, teaching Lucy the Apache way and guiding it to
graduation as a TLP, or hand control to someone else who is willing,
like the Incubator PMC. If the majority of the PMC feel this is not a
task they care to take on, then a move to the Incubator might make
sense. But if the majority feels they can provide oversight for the
period of time required (6 more months?) then there's no reason to
change things.
The anti-umbrella rule isn't hard-and-fast. Umbrella's have often led
to neglected projects and confusion, so they're generally discouraged.
The rule of thumb is one-committer-community, one-project, but it's a
rule of thumb. If a PMC can demonstrate that it's on top of its
subprojects, whether mature or incubating, the board should not object.
The board might however periodically inquire, e.g., if quarterly
reports don't provide adequate evidence that subprojects are healthy and
well monitored.
As long as Lucy is its subproject, the Lucene PMC has a responsibility
to ensure that Lucy is nurtured. This is not a huge task, but it's
still a task. Are you up for it or not?
Doug
|