You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> on 2005/09/01 01:25:40 UTC
RE: a few steps before approving a project
Cliff,
> - change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official
> charter) to include approving of all new projects
To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to second
guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects.
> - ensure all proposals use the same standard template
Fine.
> - add a question to the template asking whether the person(s)
> proposing are aware of similar open source projects inside or
> outside the ASF.
To what end? I know what is motivating this. In my view, any group that
wants to part of the ASF, under our IP and Community policies, is welcomed.
The ASF should not be in the business of forbidding people to work on things
here just because someone else feels that it should be happening in their
fiefdom. We don't even require uniqueness within the ASF, much less between
us and other groups. Should JAMES insist that the HTTP Server project shut
down mod_smtpd?
> consider having a formal liaison at a few key external open source
> communities to give a friendly notice to whenever the Incubator PMC
> knows there's a proposal that could be controversial
I am in favor of liaisons with other communities, but even making the
judgment call required above is claiming a subjective value.
> require that the Incubator PMC loops in the PRC on any project that
> could have any chance of media attention (either because of there
> overall significance of the project, the potential for controversy,
> expected vendor press releases, or the opportunity to release a joint
> statement with some other organization).
EVERY project should involve the PRC. The PRC is entirely underused, even
if overcommitted.
And don't forget that contrary to what was said on this thread, existing
PMCs *can* start their own projects from existing ASF committers and new
codebases that are developed within the ASF infrastructure without going
through the Incubator. The motivation for your e-mail would apply to those
as well.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Cliff,
>
>
>>- change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official
>>charter) to include approving of all new projects
>
>
> To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to second
> guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects.
>
>
>>- ensure all proposals use the same standard template
>
>
> Fine.
>
>
>>- add a question to the template asking whether the person(s)
>>proposing are aware of similar open source projects inside or
>>outside the ASF.
>
>
> To what end? I know what is motivating this. In my view, any group that
> wants to part of the ASF, under our IP and Community policies, is welcomed.
> The ASF should not be in the business of forbidding people to work on things
> here just because someone else feels that it should be happening in their
> fiefdom. We don't even require uniqueness within the ASF, much less between
> us and other groups. Should JAMES insist that the HTTP Server project shut
> down mod_smtpd?
And what if such a project involves forking another communities code and
claiming some of their committers? Does it not concern you _how_ that
happens, and how it makes the ASF look? In my mind, it isn't a question
of whether or not a project should start, but that the ASF should _know_
the baggage that a project will bring with it, and the issues it might
bring in relation to other projects, so that we can ensure that the
starting of the new project maintains rather than degrades our relations
with other projects.
That's all this is about in my book. If I were to be in a position to
decide about an incubating project, I'd like to know who might be
offended by the starting of that project _before_ I make my decision -
even if I decide to accept it. It just makes life easier, and more
predictable all-round.
>>consider having a formal liaison at a few key external open source
>>communities to give a friendly notice to whenever the Incubator PMC
>>knows there's a proposal that could be controversial
>
> I am in favor of liaisons with other communities, but even making the
> judgment call required above is claiming a subjective value.
Well yes. That's the judgement call that ultimately is going to have to
come from the original proposing PMC, or the people making the proposal.
They're the ones who know the landscape. Hence the need for questions on
the proposal template to prompt them to tell us.
>>require that the Incubator PMC loops in the PRC on any project that
>>could have any chance of media attention (either because of there
>>overall significance of the project, the potential for controversy,
>>expected vendor press releases, or the opportunity to release a joint
>>statement with some other organization).
>
> EVERY project should involve the PRC. The PRC is entirely underused, even
> if overcommitted.
>
> And don't forget that contrary to what was said on this thread, existing
> PMCs *can* start their own projects from existing ASF committers and new
> codebases that are developed within the ASF infrastructure without going
> through the Incubator. The motivation for your e-mail would apply to those
> as well.
Not so much in my mind. If there's no interaction in terms of code or
committers, but only in 'subject area', then it is more just plain old
competition. We may want to consider competitors, but this discussion
isn't about competitors, it is about people who might be directly
affected by our actions - e.g we fork their code.
Regards, Upayavira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Friday 02 September 2005 12:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> While we
> are at it, we should probably have our say on contests like this as
> well (http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php)
And someone have turned ALv2 into a Geronimo EULA ...
How come I don't have to click "I agree" when I download from ASF ??
Cheers
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Berin Lautenbach <be...@wingsofhermes.org>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I am generally opposed to any of the suggestions that we add
> more constraints to incubation (aside from a general constraint
> of no new projects, which I can understand for infrastructure
> reasons alone). What we need is more documentation, not more rules.
+1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Sep 1, 2005, at 1:42 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> There was ONLY one press release...that was vetted by the prc@. Please
> complain to the folks there.
>
> There was one document (unsolicited) from Gartner. I've already
> personally sent a response with help from Justin and others (Thanks
> justin).
>
> So there is nothing left for to do for me other than keep hearing
> choice words, so i'll just stop and listen. Pile it on :(
>
> If there is something else i did not do, that i have control on, let
> me know.
I think you did all the right things when they needed to be done
and I have no need for anything more, personally. I am just saying
that this kind of reaction should be expected, even if it can't be
avoided, and the right thing to do is simply improve the documentation
so that we can caution companies up-front rather than assume they
will play nice without any guidance.
I am generally opposed to any of the suggestions that we add
more constraints to incubation (aside from a general constraint
of no new projects, which I can understand for infrastructure
reasons alone). What we need is more documentation, not more rules.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
And yes, gag orders have been issued :)
-- dims
On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There was ONLY one press release...that was vetted by the prc@. Please
> complain to the folks there.
>
> There was one document (unsolicited) from Gartner. I've already
> personally sent a response with help from Justin and others (Thanks
> justin).
>
> So there is nothing left for to do for me other than keep hearing
> choice words, so i'll just stop and listen. Pile it on :(
>
> If there is something else i did not do, that i have control on, let me know.
>
> -- dims
>
> On 9/1/05, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> > I don't see what this has to do with Synapse, but whatever ...
> >
> > > IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
> > > earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
> > > showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
> > > what do we get, brick bats again.
> >
> > No, actually, nobody has complained about IONA. People are complaining
> > that the mentors are doing a crappy job of controlling the other
> > commercial organizations who seek to spin Synapse into something that
> > makes other companies look good.
> >
> > > Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
> > > the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
> > > a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
> > > one even understands that.
> >
> > Then you shouldn't have any seed code and you should just create
> > a directory and start working. You created this mess yourselves
> > by turning it into a Web Services marketing event.
> >
> > > Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
> > > Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
> > > businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
> > > reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
> > > we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
> > > die.
> >
> > Look, I am going to explain this as roughly as possible. Apache
> > exists now, today, because people like ME and Randy and Jim and
> > Brian (and now Greg and Justin and Sam and ...) have forcibly
> > prevented various companies from abusing their participation in
> > OUR projects through factually incorrect press releases. It is
> > YOUR responsibility to do that with projects that YOU agree to
> > mentor, even if it means publicly humiliating the idiots in PR
> > when they make mistakes.
> >
> > This will be a far harder task in the Web Services area (filled
> > with companies who exist solely on the basis of press releases and
> > nothing else) than it was for the original Web projects. You are
> > swimming in a sewer of bad companies trying to do good. It should
> > not be surprising that we need to hose the project down before it
> > can join Apache. We need to do that to protect both Apache and
> > the new project. It only takes ONE bad project to undue all of
> > the gains we have made within the ASF. It is the fact that we
> > take such care with new projects that differentiates Apache from
> > other sites that merely host code.
> >
> > ....Roy
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
I should have been more explicit. "ONLY one press release that i was
involved in...that was"
-- dims
On 9/1/05, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (renaming the subject to try to keep the past flames and future
> discussions somewhat separate)
>
> On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There was ONLY one press release...that was vetted by the prc@. Please
> > complain to the folks there.
>
> Actually, there were at least two that I know of:
>
> IONA: http://www.iona.com/pressroom/2005/20050822b.htm
> Sonic: http://www.sonicsoftware.com/news_events/pressitem/pressrelease_648412/index.ssp?
>
> I was the PRC member who gave feedback to IONA, which they
> incorporated. Any complaints about that one should be directed at me.
> Giving it another look now, I think I should have suggested that one
> of the sentences be reworded to not indicate that IONA is joining the
> project, but that IONA is sponsoring employees who are joining the
> project.
>
> Cliff
>
>
> > There was one document (unsolicited) from Gartner. I've already
> > personally sent a response with help from Justin and others (Thanks
> > justin).
> >
> > So there is nothing left for to do for me other than keep hearing
> > choice words, so i'll just stop and listen. Pile it on :(
> >
> > If there is something else i did not do, that i have control on, let me know.
> >
> > -- dims
> >
> > On 9/1/05, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> > > I don't see what this has to do with Synapse, but whatever ...
> > >
> > > > IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
> > > > earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
> > > > showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
> > > > what do we get, brick bats again.
> > >
> > > No, actually, nobody has complained about IONA. People are complaining
> > > that the mentors are doing a crappy job of controlling the other
> > > commercial organizations who seek to spin Synapse into something that
> > > makes other companies look good.
> > >
> > > > Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
> > > > the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
> > > > a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
> > > > one even understands that.
> > >
> > > Then you shouldn't have any seed code and you should just create
> > > a directory and start working. You created this mess yourselves
> > > by turning it into a Web Services marketing event.
> > >
> > > > Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
> > > > Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
> > > > businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
> > > > reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
> > > > we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
> > > > die.
> > >
> > > Look, I am going to explain this as roughly as possible. Apache
> > > exists now, today, because people like ME and Randy and Jim and
> > > Brian (and now Greg and Justin and Sam and ...) have forcibly
> > > prevented various companies from abusing their participation in
> > > OUR projects through factually incorrect press releases. It is
> > > YOUR responsibility to do that with projects that YOU agree to
> > > mentor, even if it means publicly humiliating the idiots in PR
> > > when they make mistakes.
> > >
> > > This will be a far harder task in the Web Services area (filled
> > > with companies who exist solely on the basis of press releases and
> > > nothing else) than it was for the original Web projects. You are
> > > swimming in a sewer of bad companies trying to do good. It should
> > > not be surprising that we need to hose the project down before it
> > > can join Apache. We need to do that to protect both Apache and
> > > the new project. It only takes ONE bad project to undue all of
> > > the gains we have made within the ASF. It is the fact that we
> > > take such care with new projects that differentiates Apache from
> > > other sites that merely host code.
> > >
> > > ....Roy
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>.
(renaming the subject to try to keep the past flames and future
discussions somewhat separate)
On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There was ONLY one press release...that was vetted by the prc@. Please
> complain to the folks there.
Actually, there were at least two that I know of:
IONA: http://www.iona.com/pressroom/2005/20050822b.htm
Sonic: http://www.sonicsoftware.com/news_events/pressitem/pressrelease_648412/index.ssp?
I was the PRC member who gave feedback to IONA, which they
incorporated. Any complaints about that one should be directed at me.
Giving it another look now, I think I should have suggested that one
of the sentences be reworded to not indicate that IONA is joining the
project, but that IONA is sponsoring employees who are joining the
project.
Cliff
> There was one document (unsolicited) from Gartner. I've already
> personally sent a response with help from Justin and others (Thanks
> justin).
>
> So there is nothing left for to do for me other than keep hearing
> choice words, so i'll just stop and listen. Pile it on :(
>
> If there is something else i did not do, that i have control on, let me know.
>
> -- dims
>
> On 9/1/05, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> > I don't see what this has to do with Synapse, but whatever ...
> >
> > > IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
> > > earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
> > > showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
> > > what do we get, brick bats again.
> >
> > No, actually, nobody has complained about IONA. People are complaining
> > that the mentors are doing a crappy job of controlling the other
> > commercial organizations who seek to spin Synapse into something that
> > makes other companies look good.
> >
> > > Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
> > > the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
> > > a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
> > > one even understands that.
> >
> > Then you shouldn't have any seed code and you should just create
> > a directory and start working. You created this mess yourselves
> > by turning it into a Web Services marketing event.
> >
> > > Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
> > > Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
> > > businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
> > > reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
> > > we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
> > > die.
> >
> > Look, I am going to explain this as roughly as possible. Apache
> > exists now, today, because people like ME and Randy and Jim and
> > Brian (and now Greg and Justin and Sam and ...) have forcibly
> > prevented various companies from abusing their participation in
> > OUR projects through factually incorrect press releases. It is
> > YOUR responsibility to do that with projects that YOU agree to
> > mentor, even if it means publicly humiliating the idiots in PR
> > when they make mistakes.
> >
> > This will be a far harder task in the Web Services area (filled
> > with companies who exist solely on the basis of press releases and
> > nothing else) than it was for the original Web projects. You are
> > swimming in a sewer of bad companies trying to do good. It should
> > not be surprising that we need to hose the project down before it
> > can join Apache. We need to do that to protect both Apache and
> > the new project. It only takes ONE bad project to undue all of
> > the gains we have made within the ASF. It is the fact that we
> > take such care with new projects that differentiates Apache from
> > other sites that merely host code.
> >
> > ....Roy
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
There was ONLY one press release...that was vetted by the prc@. Please
complain to the folks there.
There was one document (unsolicited) from Gartner. I've already
personally sent a response with help from Justin and others (Thanks
justin).
So there is nothing left for to do for me other than keep hearing
choice words, so i'll just stop and listen. Pile it on :(
If there is something else i did not do, that i have control on, let me know.
-- dims
On 9/1/05, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> I don't see what this has to do with Synapse, but whatever ...
>
> > IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
> > earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
> > showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
> > what do we get, brick bats again.
>
> No, actually, nobody has complained about IONA. People are complaining
> that the mentors are doing a crappy job of controlling the other
> commercial organizations who seek to spin Synapse into something that
> makes other companies look good.
>
> > Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
> > the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
> > a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
> > one even understands that.
>
> Then you shouldn't have any seed code and you should just create
> a directory and start working. You created this mess yourselves
> by turning it into a Web Services marketing event.
>
> > Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
> > Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
> > businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
> > reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
> > we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
> > die.
>
> Look, I am going to explain this as roughly as possible. Apache
> exists now, today, because people like ME and Randy and Jim and
> Brian (and now Greg and Justin and Sam and ...) have forcibly
> prevented various companies from abusing their participation in
> OUR projects through factually incorrect press releases. It is
> YOUR responsibility to do that with projects that YOU agree to
> mentor, even if it means publicly humiliating the idiots in PR
> when they make mistakes.
>
> This will be a far harder task in the Web Services area (filled
> with companies who exist solely on the basis of press releases and
> nothing else) than it was for the original Web projects. You are
> swimming in a sewer of bad companies trying to do good. It should
> not be surprising that we need to hose the project down before it
> can join Apache. We need to do that to protect both Apache and
> the new project. It only takes ONE bad project to undue all of
> the gains we have made within the ASF. It is the fact that we
> take such care with new projects that differentiates Apache from
> other sites that merely host code.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving
a project)
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Am still waiting for someone to point
> out to an actual problem ("factually incorrect press releases"). Last
> time i checked, people pay to put out press releases to make them look
> good. ("seek to spin Synapse into something that makes other companies
> look good.").
>
> May be justin is right, we should ban anyone involved in any incubator
> project from making press releases. As far as i know no one has caught
> flak so far derby had press releases, beehive had them, stdcxx had
> them...
and stdcxx is the other example in the last 45 days of a badly written
release (which was subsequently corrected, after it was initially
published.) This seems to be a pattern. Of course Covalent, my own
employeer, published something in conjunction with the donation of
mod_aspdotnet. But then again, Jim Jag and I both are on that marketing
staff about making accurate statements when it comes to the ASF.
We have to be very careful on the cusp of commercial code becoming ASF
based code... the marketing depts are still stuck on the 'our code'
model, and are unlikely to grok the ASF concept (offending us and many
of our fans and detractors)...
...so maybe an outright ban is appropriate? Or maybe the 'press
education' planned by the PRC should actually be 'vendor education'
upfront, to avoid misattributions.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Hehe, thanks :)
-- dims
On 9/2/05, Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org> wrote:
> On 02 Sep 2005, at 06:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
> > Why is it just us catching the flak?
>
> Because we feel you're one of us, rather than one of "them". Look at it
> as a token of ultimate appreciation.
>
> </Steven>
> --
> Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
> Outerthought Open Source Java & XML
> stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.
Well,
after following this thread (even though not actively taking part) I'd
say the stereotype of large and close Italian families fits even
better.
Which is just fine with me, being born just 30km from the Italian border ;)
regards,
Martin
P.S.: Can you cook some spaghetti, Mamma mia ;) ?
On 9/2/05, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 2, 2005, at 4:22 AM, Steven Noels wrote:
>
> > On 02 Sep 2005, at 06:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Why is it just us catching the flak?
> >>
> >
> > Because we feel you're one of us, rather than one of "them". Look
> > at it as a token of ultimate appreciation.
> >
>
> Here here! :)
>
> IMO, this is the type of "discussion" that close families have ;)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Trainings in English and German
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Sep 2, 2005, at 4:22 AM, Steven Noels wrote:
> On 02 Sep 2005, at 06:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
>
>> Why is it just us catching the flak?
>>
>
> Because we feel you're one of us, rather than one of "them". Look
> at it as a token of ultimate appreciation.
>
Here here! :)
IMO, this is the type of "discussion" that close families have ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 02 Sep 2005, at 06:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Why is it just us catching the flak?
Because we feel you're one of us, rather than one of "them". Look at it
as a token of ultimate appreciation.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought Open Source Java & XML
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Roy,
Understood. Please see the reply from Sanjiva about Foo vs "Apache
Foo" (message id is <11...@localhost.localdomain>)
thanks,
dims
On 9/2/05, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2005, at 9:53 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
> > Am hurt by the words "You turned this into a Web Services marketing
> > event" (Though i made it really clear multiple times that there was
> > only on press release that i was part of and that was vetted by the
> > prc@) But i will live and learn. Am still waiting for someone to point
> > out to an actual problem ("factually incorrect press releases"). Last
> > time i checked, people pay to put out press releases to make them look
> > good. ("seek to spin Synapse into something that makes other companies
> > look good.").
>
> Ah, maybe you are missing how corporations work in the US.
> If you ask a corporation to join a collaborative project with other
> companies, they expect to do a press release about it. In fact,
> if they are a public company, they are mandated by the SEC and
> antitrust laws to do a press release to avoid lawsuits over insider
> trading. Public companies must be even-handed when informing the
> public of events that might impact their share price.
>
> If you want to avoid that, just start the project and don't ask
> companies to get involved -- ask individual developers.
>
> The only problem I know of in the Synapse releases was the lack
> of "Apache Synapse" in the project name. It didn't bother me. AFAIK,
> this thread wasn't even directly about Synapse -- we were talking
> about press and incubated projects in general.
>
> > May be justin is right, we should ban anyone involved in any incubator
> > project from making press releases. As far as i know no one has caught
> > flak so far derby had press releases, beehive had them, stdcxx had
> > them...
>
> Eh? stdcxx is in considerable danger of being flushed down the
> toilet because of a Roguewave press release and the fact that
> none of the three mentors seems to have enough time to actually
> mentor the project. Derby press releases were a huge discussion
> at the time (even with three ASF board members guiding the project).
> Beehive was carefully monitored by Cliff at the time and I don't
> recall any problems there.
>
> > But hey you picked us to be the scape goat and use it as an
> > excuse for introducing a "NO PRESS RELEASES" policy. That's fine.
>
> Actually, I think Justin was fed up with the stdcxx folks. The
> Gartner crap (which is always crap) just happened to come along
> at the wrong time.
>
> > If you don't want companies to talk about their involvement in Apache
> > projects, then make that a policy and ban ALL press releases (OR) make
> > sure there are no press releases get out w/o prc approval.
>
> The former is what people are proposing in this thread. The latter
> has been Apache policy for some time, though policies without
> documentation are a waste of time. I've already told the PRC that.
>
> > While we
> > are at it, we should probably have our say on contests like this as
> > well (http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php). Have you read the stdcxx
> > press release?
> > (http://www.roguewave.com/news/press/index.cfm?PRID=117).
> >
> > Why is it just us catching the flak?
>
> The flak is on the PRC list, where it belongs.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before
approving a project)
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On September 2, 2005 11:54:50 AM -0700 "Roy T. Fielding"
<fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> Actually, I think Justin was fed up with the stdcxx folks. The
> Gartner crap (which is always crap) just happened to come along
> at the wrong time.
For the record (since this is a public list), the stdcxx issue has now been
resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
But, yes, the issue with publicity is more than just Synapse - almost every
Incubated projects that involves corporations unfamiliar with the ASF (and
a few including companies that know us well) has had some hiccups with
publicity in some way or another. It's part of the learning experience for
them. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Sep 1, 2005, at 9:53 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Am hurt by the words "You turned this into a Web Services marketing
> event" (Though i made it really clear multiple times that there was
> only on press release that i was part of and that was vetted by the
> prc@) But i will live and learn. Am still waiting for someone to point
> out to an actual problem ("factually incorrect press releases"). Last
> time i checked, people pay to put out press releases to make them look
> good. ("seek to spin Synapse into something that makes other companies
> look good.").
Ah, maybe you are missing how corporations work in the US.
If you ask a corporation to join a collaborative project with other
companies, they expect to do a press release about it. In fact,
if they are a public company, they are mandated by the SEC and
antitrust laws to do a press release to avoid lawsuits over insider
trading. Public companies must be even-handed when informing the
public of events that might impact their share price.
If you want to avoid that, just start the project and don't ask
companies to get involved -- ask individual developers.
The only problem I know of in the Synapse releases was the lack
of "Apache Synapse" in the project name. It didn't bother me. AFAIK,
this thread wasn't even directly about Synapse -- we were talking
about press and incubated projects in general.
> May be justin is right, we should ban anyone involved in any incubator
> project from making press releases. As far as i know no one has caught
> flak so far derby had press releases, beehive had them, stdcxx had
> them...
Eh? stdcxx is in considerable danger of being flushed down the
toilet because of a Roguewave press release and the fact that
none of the three mentors seems to have enough time to actually
mentor the project. Derby press releases were a huge discussion
at the time (even with three ASF board members guiding the project).
Beehive was carefully monitored by Cliff at the time and I don't
recall any problems there.
> But hey you picked us to be the scape goat and use it as an
> excuse for introducing a "NO PRESS RELEASES" policy. That's fine.
Actually, I think Justin was fed up with the stdcxx folks. The
Gartner crap (which is always crap) just happened to come along
at the wrong time.
> If you don't want companies to talk about their involvement in Apache
> projects, then make that a policy and ban ALL press releases (OR) make
> sure there are no press releases get out w/o prc approval.
The former is what people are proposing in this thread. The latter
has been Apache policy for some time, though policies without
documentation are a waste of time. I've already told the PRC that.
> While we
> are at it, we should probably have our say on contests like this as
> well (http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php). Have you read the stdcxx
> press release?
> (http://www.roguewave.com/news/press/index.cfm?PRID=117).
>
> Why is it just us catching the flak?
The flak is on the PRC list, where it belongs.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Roy,
We did not want to shut the door on anyone bringing in some code,
hence we are going thru the incubator. Infravio is donating some code,
am hopeful committers from Sonic and IONA will do so as well (code
that they have copyright on). Am actually glad that we are taking the
highway and meeting these doubts, questions head on instead of landing
up in trouble later. If we are facing so much flak for doing all the
right things at the right time. I can't imagine what flak we'd get if
we had taken short-cuts and or circumvent processes/procedures. I am
still hopeful that we will continue to use incubation process and
personally am glad that we are doing this thru incubator.
Am hurt by the words "You turned this into a Web Services marketing
event" (Though i made it really clear multiple times that there was
only on press release that i was part of and that was vetted by the
prc@) But i will live and learn. Am still waiting for someone to point
out to an actual problem ("factually incorrect press releases"). Last
time i checked, people pay to put out press releases to make them look
good. ("seek to spin Synapse into something that makes other companies
look good.").
May be justin is right, we should ban anyone involved in any incubator
project from making press releases. As far as i know no one has caught
flak so far derby had press releases, beehive had them, stdcxx had
them...But hey you picked us to be the scape goat and use it as an
excuse for introducing a "NO PRESS RELEASES" policy. That's fine. Just
make it an ACTUAL policy for incubation process and that way we don't
have to debate who said what and when. IF that's not what you want,
then please say what you want in the new policy. ("Press releases
should go thru prc@"? yep, we did that as i said multiple times).
If you don't want companies to talk about their involvement in Apache
projects, then make that a policy and ban ALL press releases (OR) make
sure there are no press releases get out w/o prc approval. While we
are at it, we should probably have our say on contests like this as
well (http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php). Have you read the stdcxx
press release? (http://www.roguewave.com/news/press/index.cfm?PRID=117).
Why is it just us catching the flak?
-- dims
On 9/1/05, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> I don't see what this has to do with Synapse, but whatever ...
>
> > IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
> > earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
> > showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
> > what do we get, brick bats again.
>
> No, actually, nobody has complained about IONA. People are complaining
> that the mentors are doing a crappy job of controlling the other
> commercial organizations who seek to spin Synapse into something that
> makes other companies look good.
>
> > Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
> > the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
> > a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
> > one even understands that.
>
> Then you shouldn't have any seed code and you should just create
> a directory and start working. You created this mess yourselves
> by turning it into a Web Services marketing event.
>
> > Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
> > Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
> > businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
> > reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
> > we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
> > die.
>
> Look, I am going to explain this as roughly as possible. Apache
> exists now, today, because people like ME and Randy and Jim and
> Brian (and now Greg and Justin and Sam and ...) have forcibly
> prevented various companies from abusing their participation in
> OUR projects through factually incorrect press releases. It is
> YOUR responsibility to do that with projects that YOU agree to
> mentor, even if it means publicly humiliating the idiots in PR
> when they make mistakes.
>
> This will be a far harder task in the Web Services area (filled
> with companies who exist solely on the basis of press releases and
> nothing else) than it was for the original Web projects. You are
> swimming in a sewer of bad companies trying to do good. It should
> not be surprising that we need to hose the project down before it
> can join Apache. We need to do that to protect both Apache and
> the new project. It only takes ONE bad project to undue all of
> the gains we have made within the ASF. It is the fact that we
> take such care with new projects that differentiates Apache from
> other sites that merely host code.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
I don't see what this has to do with Synapse, but whatever ...
> IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
> earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
> showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
> what do we get, brick bats again.
No, actually, nobody has complained about IONA. People are complaining
that the mentors are doing a crappy job of controlling the other
commercial organizations who seek to spin Synapse into something that
makes other companies look good.
> Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
> the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
> a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
> one even understands that.
Then you shouldn't have any seed code and you should just create
a directory and start working. You created this mess yourselves
by turning it into a Web Services marketing event.
> Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
> Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
> businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
> reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
> we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
> die.
Look, I am going to explain this as roughly as possible. Apache
exists now, today, because people like ME and Randy and Jim and
Brian (and now Greg and Justin and Sam and ...) have forcibly
prevented various companies from abusing their participation in
OUR projects through factually incorrect press releases. It is
YOUR responsibility to do that with projects that YOU agree to
mentor, even if it means publicly humiliating the idiots in PR
when they make mistakes.
This will be a far harder task in the Web Services area (filled
with companies who exist solely on the basis of press releases and
nothing else) than it was for the original Web projects. You are
swimming in a sewer of bad companies trying to do good. It should
not be surprising that we need to hose the project down before it
can join Apache. We need to do that to protect both Apache and
the new project. It only takes ONE bad project to undue all of
the gains we have made within the ASF. It is the fact that we
take such care with new projects that differentiates Apache from
other sites that merely host code.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Friday 02 September 2005 04:11, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> I just would like to hear more thoughts from people about whether
> there are things we could do to improve our process of approving new
> proposals as the ASF continues to grow.
Whether or not the ASF needs both belt and suspenders seems to be a tricky
task. On one hand, the ICLA requires the contributor to be the original
author, but on the other hand it seems that this is not enough, in case such
code have had some kind of public exposure.
I just don't get it. Why does that matter, compared to the "original
contributor" outright stealing the code from somewhere else? We assume that
this doesn't happen, and why should we therefor assume that a package for a
new subproject that a existing ASF committer has hacked together, gained some
fellow ASFers support for and ready to jump in 'somewhere' would require
"audit trail", signatures from employer and what not.
IMVHO, let the committers experiment outside ASF repositories without
requirement to go through Incubation.
As for commercial codebases turned OpenSource, projects sponsored by
companies, projects wanting to implement specifications, projects hosted
elsewhere prior to coming to ASF and codebases with many, possibly
independent, authors is what I thought the Incubator was initially for. Here
I have no problem that a very rigorous process is put in place, with strict
requirements for graduation, PROVIDED that those are well-known,
objective/measurable and understood.
Another danger that may lurk in the shadows, is that the "Apache Way" gets
diluted by too fast influx of new projects/committers, and mentors/champions
taking on more than they should. Not sure if it is true, but I get the
feeling that more and more projects have "passive committers" to increase
numbers and gain credibility.
My devaluing 2 cents.
Cheers
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Done.
thanks,
dims
On 9/1/05, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dims,
>
> With all due respect for your frustration and its expression (I'm
> actually not being sarcastic), could you also respond to the subject
> of this thread and possibly the thoughts that started it? I was
> really hoping this could remain a discussion of the pros and cons of
> things along those lines.
>
> I realize that the thread changed track long before this post, but I'm
> arbitrarily picking right now to request that any flames against or in
> defense of some past proposal be posted under a different subject
> line.
>
> I just would like to hear more thoughts from people about whether
> there are things we could do to improve our process of approving new
> proposals as the ASF continues to grow.
>
> Cliff
>
>
> On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > My 2 cents, Hani style :)
> >
> > <rant>
>
> <snip/>
>
> > </rant>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>.
Dims,
With all due respect for your frustration and its expression (I'm
actually not being sarcastic), could you also respond to the subject
of this thread and possibly the thoughts that started it? I was
really hoping this could remain a discussion of the pros and cons of
things along those lines.
I realize that the thread changed track long before this post, but I'm
arbitrarily picking right now to request that any flames against or in
defense of some past proposal be posted under a different subject
line.
I just would like to hear more thoughts from people about whether
there are things we could do to improve our process of approving new
proposals as the ASF continues to grow.
Cliff
On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My 2 cents, Hani style :)
>
> <rant>
<snip/>
> </rant>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
My 2 cents, Hani style :)
<rant>
Names of individual committers are on the Synapse Proposal...No one
had ANY problems when the WS PMC was struggling to gain acceptance and
struggling to get people excited and willing to contribute. No one
lifted a finger when we got bad press because of IBM's or JBoss's
fork.
Suddenly when we get some traction with the exciting work we are doing
and news spreads, we get the brickbats from EXACTLY the same people
who should be supportive and understanding. Am just getting sick of
it. Incubator won't graduate projects if there isn't diversity. IF you
try to build diversity from the get-go then we get an earful.
IF we even seem to appear to sneak something by AM sure we will get an
earful BUT in this case we courted IONA and got their support and
showed that we can build diversity that spans OW and Apache. For this
what do we get, brick bats again.
No one has told us that we did a good job getting many people from
various backgrounds to work on something exciting and new and cutting
edge. All we hear are innuendoes...No one is willing to tell us
EXACTLY what the team that put together this proposal did wrong. Yes,
we could have mentioned that there could be some fall out because of
OW/Celtix. BUT we took care of it by working with the folks involved
and getting them interested in what we are doing. Yes, we could have
secretly email the PMC. BUT THIS IS OPEN SOURCE for god's sake. If
you have a problem, talk about it in general mailing lists.
Look we have no code, some code from Infravio is using Axis 1.X and
the porposal makes it clear that it is only for "consultation" and not
a seeding codebase. So we are practically starting from scratch. No
one even understands that.
Am getting demoralized now because of all this brouhaha over nothing.
Guess, we don't really mean to be open. Suddenly even building
businesses around Open Source seems to be a bad idea given the
reactions for just one DAMN PROPOSAL. I guess given all the acrimony
we should stop introducing any projects in Apache. Let's just rot and
die.
/me wishes he were an employee of MSFT
</rant>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 01 Sep 2005, at 01:25, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> In my view, any group that
> wants to part of the ASF, under our IP and Community policies, is
> welcomed.
> The ASF should not be in the business of forbidding people to work on
> things
> here just because someone else feels that it should be happening in
> their
> fiefdom.
Someone should triple-check that a project consists of people rather
than industry consortia players.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought Open Source Java & XML
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Sep 1, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
>> IMHO, Incubator CANNOT take a decision based on a proposal. A badly
>> written proposal with best of intentions will not make it and folks
>> will not resubmit stuff just because a similar proj got rejected
>> before. I've always thought that the role of Incubator is to make SURE
>> that a project is ready for becoming a normal ASF project.
>>
>
> Also, the Incubator has the responsibility to watch a podling
> and determine if it should continue. Certainly this would imply
> that it has the responsibility to do so at the start. Plus,
> the Incubator has the responsibility for the "acceptance"
> of the new project. I just think that a RTC policy is
> better than a CTR policy for that acceptance, for the same
> reason we do so with code: stability and reliability.
I'm guessing you ment the stability and reliability of the Apache
Software Foundation, not the 0.0.1 release candidate of a newly minted,
incubating project :)
And with that justification, +1 across the board to your previous
comments.
Davanum - and other critics of this proposal - it's going to be your job
to ensure that the incubator doesn't use this responsibility as a club,
indescriminantly or worse yet, to descriminate about certain types of
software, languages, healthy communities or so on. Remember that the
folks exercising this oversight serve at the pleasure of the board, and
if there are problems here, the problems can be addressed on a case by
case basis :)
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Sep 1, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Jim,
>
> IMHO, Incubator CANNOT take a decision based on a proposal. A badly
> written proposal with best of intentions will not make it and folks
> will not resubmit stuff just because a similar proj got rejected
> before. I've always thought that the role of Incubator is to make SURE
> that a project is ready for becoming a normal ASF project.
>
Also, the Incubator has the responsibility to watch a podling
and determine if it should continue. Certainly this would imply
that it has the responsibility to do so at the start. Plus,
the Incubator has the responsibility for the "acceptance"
of the new project. I just think that a RTC policy is
better than a CTR policy for that acceptance, for the same
reason we do so with code: stability and reliability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On September 1, 2005 11:32:49 AM -0400 Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> The problem is that, up until the Incubator, there was
> relatively little oversight on new and incoming projects, at
> least in how they entered the ASF. Certainly the board
> could not keep track, and PMCs would occasionally
> not keep the board up to date. You then add in the fact
> that some of those projects had no concept of what
> the ASF was about, etc,... and it was a non-optimal
> situation.
>
> The Incubator was designed to be a funnel and a clearinghouse
> for new projects; yes, for the legal aspects, yes to
> ensure that the community grows and develops as it
> should, but also, I feel, to look at projects and
> see how they fit; to basically be the eyes and ears of
> the board with respect to these new projects.
>
> Now certainly having a PMC sponsor a project says
> a great deal and the Incubator does, and should,
> know that that approval carries a lot of weight.
> But again, I don't feel it is unreasonable for the
> Incubator also formally accept a podling, via
> some mechanism.
+1.
> To be blunt, the PMC is worried about the PMC alone; the
> Incubator is concerned about the ASF in general. Once in
> a rare while, the 2 might have conflicts.
The Incubator PMC may also be aware of issues that the other PMC is not
cognizant of.
> Lets be even more blunt. Once a podling is accepted
> into the Incubator, it is awarded almost instant credibility.
> Basically, it is using the Apache name and the Apache
> brand. Certainly the Incubator should ensure that any
> podling doesn't abuse that, and it should also ensure that
> the proposal and podling isn't just an avenue for creating
> instant buzz and instant credibility, for the benefit
> of the podling 1st and the ASF secondly (or less).
>
> The board has said many times, concerning growth, that
> when the brakes need to be applied, the Incubator would
> be the 1st entity to feel it, or want it. They are
> the canary in the coal mine.
+1. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
The problem is that, up until the Incubator, there was
relatively little oversight on new and incoming projects, at
least in how they entered the ASF. Certainly the board
could not keep track, and PMCs would occasionally
not keep the board up to date. You then add in the fact
that some of those projects had no concept of what
the ASF was about, etc,... and it was a non-optimal
situation.
The Incubator was designed to be a funnel and a clearinghouse
for new projects; yes, for the legal aspects, yes to
ensure that the community grows and develops as it
should, but also, I feel, to look at projects and
see how they fit; to basically be the eyes and ears of
the board with respect to these new projects.
Now certainly having a PMC sponsor a project says
a great deal and the Incubator does, and should,
know that that approval carries a lot of weight.
But again, I don't feel it is unreasonable for the
Incubator also formally accept a podling, via
some mechanism.
To be blunt, the PMC is worried about the PMC alone; the
Incubator is concerned about the ASF in general. Once in
a rare while, the 2 might have conflicts.
Lets be even more blunt. Once a podling is accepted
into the Incubator, it is awarded almost instant credibility.
Basically, it is using the Apache name and the Apache
brand. Certainly the Incubator should ensure that any
podling doesn't abuse that, and it should also ensure that
the proposal and podling isn't just an avenue for creating
instant buzz and instant credibility, for the benefit
of the podling 1st and the ASF secondly (or less).
The board has said many times, concerning growth, that
when the brakes need to be applied, the Incubator would
be the 1st entity to feel it, or want it. They are
the canary in the coal mine.
On Sep 1, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Jim,
>
> IMHO, Incubator CANNOT take a decision based on a proposal. A badly
> written proposal with best of intentions will not make it and folks
> will not resubmit stuff just because a similar proj got rejected
> before. I've always thought that the role of Incubator is to make SURE
> that a project is ready for becoming a normal ASF project.
>
> If we can't scale, it's our problem and we have to fix it. We should
> not fix it by closing our doors. Then its a old boys (and girls)
> club....
>
> -- dims
>
> On 9/1/05, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 31, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Cliff,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official
>>>> charter) to include approving of all new projects
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to
>>> second
>>> guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No, but it is the role of the Incubator to ensure that
>> new projects are in the best interest of the foundation,
>> and not simply be a rubber stamp. The Incubator, for
>> example, I think has the responsibility to be able
>> to say "You know, this is a great proposal, but there
>> are too many podlings right now, and we cannot accept
>> it" and have that honored.
>>
>> For things as important as new projects within the
>> ASF, having the Incubator vote on acceptance is, I
>> think, a small consideration.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service
> Platform
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Jim,
IMHO, Incubator CANNOT take a decision based on a proposal. A badly
written proposal with best of intentions will not make it and folks
will not resubmit stuff just because a similar proj got rejected
before. I've always thought that the role of Incubator is to make SURE
that a project is ready for becoming a normal ASF project.
If we can't scale, it's our problem and we have to fix it. We should
not fix it by closing our doors. Then its a old boys (and girls)
club....
-- dims
On 9/1/05, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 31, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> > Cliff,
> >
> >
> >> - change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official
> >> charter) to include approving of all new projects
> >>
> >
> > To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to
> > second
> > guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects.
> >
>
> No, but it is the role of the Incubator to ensure that
> new projects are in the best interest of the foundation,
> and not simply be a rubber stamp. The Incubator, for
> example, I think has the responsibility to be able
> to say "You know, this is a great proposal, but there
> are too many podlings right now, and we cannot accept
> it" and have that honored.
>
> For things as important as new projects within the
> ASF, having the Incubator vote on acceptance is, I
> think, a small consideration.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: a few steps before approving a project
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Aug 31, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Cliff,
>
>
>> - change the Incubator PMC charter (not that we have a official
>> charter) to include approving of all new projects
>>
>
> To quote (or paraphrase) Roy, it is not the Incubator PMC's role to
> second
> guess other ASF PMCs when it comes to introducing new ASF projects.
>
No, but it is the role of the Incubator to ensure that
new projects are in the best interest of the foundation,
and not simply be a rubber stamp. The Incubator, for
example, I think has the responsibility to be able
to say "You know, this is a great proposal, but there
are too many podlings right now, and we cannot accept
it" and have that honored.
For things as important as new projects within the
ASF, having the Incubator vote on acceptance is, I
think, a small consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org