Re: [VOTE] Revised dormancy policy - take 3

[Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>]

+1

since I requested a zombie resurrection, it would be nice having a
clear procedure on "how to revive dormant components" and put the
whole procedure in our Wiki.
Count on me if any help is needed!

Simo

http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/



On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Jason Pyeron <jp...@pdinc.us> wrote:
> -1, needs better handling of details and an outside revival procedure.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil.steitz@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 16:25
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Subject: [VOTE] Revised dormancy policy - take 3
>>
>> Thanks, all, for the great comments on the previous versions [1][2].
>> I have tried to incorporate them.
>>
>> Revised Dormancy Policy
>>
>> 0) To move a component to dormant requires a VOTE.   A single -1
>> suffices to postpone the action; but a -1 in a dormancy vote
>> is really a +1 to help sustain or advance the component.
>> Dormancy VOTEs will remain open for two weeks.
>>
>> 1) When a component is voted "dormant":
>>     a) the main web site and site navigation links show the
>> component as dormant
>>     b) the component site and component JIRA page display a
>> "dormant disclaimer" (TBD)
>
> I think this part should be fleshed out more before a vote relying on it.
>
>
>>     c) JIRA remains open (not merged into Commons-Dormant,
>> but JIRA project page displays disclaimer)
>
> How long will it remain open?
>
>>     d) svn remains open (but no release without a revival VOTE)
>
> Open as in commits allowed? I think [1] has a bad idea about commits.
>
>>
>> 2) To revive a component requires a VOTE.  Any ASF committer
>> interested in bringing the zombie back to life can initiate
>> this action. Revival VOTEs are majority rule.
>
> I think if there are issues in JIRA, and patches are being submitted, that in an
> of itself should revive a project. Otherwise a vote based on some quorum not a
> majority.
>
> Think about very stable old code [3]. It would likely be dormant until a
> business/security objective caused something to change.
>
>>
>> 3) Dormant status for a Commons component is not a substitute
>> for the Apache Attic.  Components that we decide are obsolete
>> or for other reasons are unlikely to ever be revived should
>> be moved to the Apache Attic.  To retire a component to the
>> Attic requires a vote similar to 0).
>>
>> votes, please.  This VOTE will remain open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/bbnuxxozsnkapfhr
>> [2] http://markmail.org/message/3bot5xiazanqavqg
> [3] http://markmail.org/message/bjkjipbdpjr2yaos
>
>
> --
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> -                                                               -
> - Jason Pyeron                      PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
> - Principal Consultant              10 West 24th Street #100    -
> - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333            Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
> -                                                               -
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org