stratos-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] probationary TLP experiment
Date Thu, 08 Aug 2013 08:32:01 GMT
Heh, well that wasn't quite the response i was expecting.

>From all the previous discussions around pTLPs we know there are some who
really don't like the idea, i don't want this to turn into another big
argument so I've been trying to think of ways this could happen with
minimum of fuss. In the email at the start of this thread a suggestion was
"propose an interim step in the incubation process. e.g. start as a
podling, move to pTLP when certain criteria are met". I like that, but one
problem is there is some baggage around the word "pTLP".

A problem with starting the pTLP experiment from a podling is always going
to be whats the difference between becoming a pTLP or just graduating, so a
better understanding of that will be helpful (for me anyway) - is there
something that has been done already since Stratos has been a podling that
now means a pTLP makes less sense? One of those things might be the
trademark search, but thats not yet been done for Stratos.

Doing a release is being discussed but thats one of the more problematic
activities while in the Incubator and can potentially drag on and on, so
finding a way out before that would be good. Either via a pTLP or just
trying for graduation and arguing that the high number of existing ASF
people involved means the release will still be properly vetted even
outside of the Incubator. But again that just brings me back to whats the
difference to becoming a pTLP or just graduating?


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Ross Gardler <>wrote:

> The whole point of using Stratos as a test case for the probationary TLP
> idea was to provide a vehicle for those who felt this was viable route to
> incubation to demonstrate how it would work. Specifically it was intended
> to be an opportunity to start to answer the concerns that I, and others,
> raised about skipping the IPMC altogether.
> However, as Ant and Suresh point out, in the more than six weeks since I
> summarized the discussions during the proposal phase the Stratos project
> has done almost all it needs to graduate.
> I agree with Ant that at this point it makes more sense for mentors to
> spend their time finishing incubation and graduate the project as a
> standard podling.
> Chris and anyone else who support the pTLP idea can take the outline
> process I pulled together from our earlier discussions (summarized at the
> start of this thread) and apply them to some other project as their time
> allows. It is too late to do it here. Stratos should not have to go through
> the pain of defining a new process unless it brings benefit to the project
> itself.
> Ross
> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> Senior Technology Evangelist
> Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc.
> A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation
> On 7 August 2013 13:16, Suresh Marru <> wrote:
>> On Aug 7, 2013, at 3:46 PM, ant elder <> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
>> > Thanks, Ant. I'm on a phone right now, and have not read the
>> background. (so, terse response). But the dev@ list is fine. In my mind,
>> a probationary TLP is a conversation between a community and the Board. And
>> dev@ is the community, so is the best place to discuss before bringing
>> an idea to the Board.
>> >
>> > On Aug 6, 2013 1:10 AM, "ant elder" <> wrote:
>> > I was wondering if the Stratos dev list is the best place to be
>> > discussing this, there are probably interested people who aren't
>> > subscribed or following here, though maybe general@incubator wouldn't
>> > be ideal either. I've cc'd Chris and Greg in this email so they at
>> > least know its here as they've expressed interest in the past.
>> >
>> > Ok lets do it here then.
>> >
>> > One of the things i'm stuggling with at the moment is what would be the
>> differences with Stratos becoming a pTLP compared with just graduating.
>> >
>> > Looking at graduating, the Incubator minimum graduation requirements
>> are documented here:
>> >
>> > With Stratos having so many of its contributors be existing ASF
>> committers, PMC members, or ASF members it would be easy to argue for
>> automatically ticking off many of those requirements and then not much is
>> left to do on the graduation requirements list. The main one would be
>> checking the "Stratos" name for trademark issues, eg someone needs to go
>> through: Once thats done
>> then a regular resolution for graduation could be submitted to the board.
>> >
>> > I know that wouldn't so much help progress the pTLP topic, is that a
>> goal of Stratos here?
>> >
>> >    …ant
>> Hi Ant,
>> This is exactly I am having the trouble getting my head around. I am
>> seeing this as two separate issues, one furthering the topic of pTLP with
>> Stratos as the use case. This will be a good guinea pig project with a
>> wealth of exiting ASF and PMC members/committers. Second quick leap into
>> graduation, which I agree is only few steps away.
>> Hi All,
>> I see the project is doing very well in engaging the community, doing lot
>> of information sharing and conducting business in mailing lists and jira.
>>  Either pTLP or graduation, the outstanding tasks I am looking forward to
>> see the progress: getting a release right with properly formulated license
>> and notice files (especially for convenience binaries which bundle third
>> party dependencies) and see working progress in removing dependence on ws02
>> repositories. I see now a big list of dependencies are not coming from
>> maven central but from wso2 repos this is good to avoid. Essentially the
>> parent pom [1] should be able to point to apache parent and remove all the
>> repos here.
>> Suresh
>> [1] -

View raw message