Re: incubation disclaimer and infrastructural reshuffle

[Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>]

Leo Simons wrote:
> 
> Branding
> --------
> The podling website should have a notice (<insert here>) on its
> front page pointing out that its under incubation, a notice in the
> root of its cvs (in README.txt or WARNING.txt or ...), a notice
> inside and alongside any downloadables it produces in a prominent
> location, and ideally, a notice wherever a sponsoring project
> directly links to one of the podlings' resources (other than its
> website).

I would go further.  Essentially, a release by a podling would require a 
vote by the incubator PMC to do so.  I would recommend that this be an 
extremely rare event.

Alphas, Betas, nightly builds, etc., I have no problem with.

> Finally, the podling needs to display the incubator logo on its
> website.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> back to my corner!
> 
> - Leo

- Sam Ruby


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: incubation disclaimer and infrastructural reshuffle

[Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>]

Stephen McConnell wrote:

> BZZZT, BZZZT, the above statement presumes that "release" and 
> "publication" are one and the same. The distinction between a vote to 
> "release" and a vote to "publish" is in my option an import aspect of 
> active community based decision making. Communities vote to release, 
> and PMCs demonstrate responsible oversite through control of 
> “publication. The people who care about the subject make a collective 
> decision to release something. That decision is not binding on Apache. 
> All it does is establish a recommendation to a PMC to publish. A PMC 
> can then endorce (or not) a release recommendation by the community.

well, sure. Totally agree. You've got the roles and responsibilities
right.

In theory.

In practice, such an approach is way too cumbersome. The
PMC is supposed to be at least a substantial subset of the
development community. Meaning the same people would vote
twice on the same thing. Something, by the way, which in a
healthy community is usually not controversial at all.

So, we start with your picture of roles and responsibilities and
then we streamline the process a bit. We usually roll all those
votes into one, put in place a release manager, etc etc.

Or, you might say, we implement the community vote to release
by lazy consensus,  and we might do so for the choice of release
manager as well.

Natural thought: "lets make the PMC vote lazy consensus as well".
And there is a problem. Can't do that. Legal oversight, bylaws,
accountability, etc etc. So the PMC must always hold the publication
vote.

But, since we've made the "release" vote subject ot lazy consensus,
and since the only "publication" vote a PMC holds is on the
publication of "releases", lets make "publication vote" into synonymous
to "release vote".

And there you have it steve: we're actually in agreement! There's
really no need for you to BZZZT here.

> This approach reflects a respect for the *decisions* of the community 
> while delivering the appropriate due-diligence by the responsible PMC. 

Respect for the decisions by the community from the PMC had
better be implicit and it had better generally be known to all
participants that the respect is there. If this is not crystal clear
to all, what you have is a screwed-up community.

cheers!

- Leo




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: incubation disclaimer and infrastructural reshuffle

[Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>]

Leo Simons wrote:

> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> I would go further. Essentially, a release by a podling would require 
>> a vote by the incubator PMC to do so.
>
>
> a release by *any* project requires its supervising PMC to vote
> it through. Since for podlings, the supervising PMC is by definition
> the incubator PMC, you're not going anywhere spectacular :D
>
> - LSD
>
> Roy wrote recently:
>
>> Ok - going with Apache tradition - its not the PMC that makes the 
>> decision of a *release*.
>
>
> BZZZT. According to the bylaws, the only people authorized to make 
> decisions
> on behalf of the ASF (including the decision to release code to the 
> general
> public) are officers or the PMC responsible for the project. All other
> votes are to be ignored or considered advisory only, and no I don't care
> how long some of our umbrella projects have been ignoring that fact.
>
> ....Roy


BZZZT, BZZZT, the above statement presumes that "release" and 
"publication" are one and the same. The distinction between a vote to 
"release" and a vote to "publish" is in my option an import aspect of 
active community based decision making. Communities vote to release, and 
PMCs demonstrate responsible oversite through control of “publication. 
The people who care about the subject make a collective decision to 
release something. That decision is not binding on Apache. All it does 
is establish a recommendation to a PMC to publish. A PMC can then 
endorce (or not) a release recommendation by the community. This 
approach reflects a respect for the *decisions* of the community while 
delivering the appropriate due-diligence by the responsible PMC.

Stephen.


>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: incubation disclaimer and infrastructural reshuffle

[Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>]

Sam Ruby wrote:

> I would go further.  Essentially, a release by a podling would require 
> a vote by the incubator PMC to do so.

a release by *any* project requires its supervising PMC to vote
it through. Since for podlings, the supervising PMC is by definition
the incubator PMC, you're not going anywhere spectacular :D

- LSD

Roy wrote recently:

> Ok - going with Apache tradition - its not the PMC that makes the 
> decision of a *release*.

BZZZT.  According to the bylaws, the only people authorized to make 
decisions
on behalf of the ASF (including the decision to release code to the general
public) are officers or the PMC responsible for the project.  All other
votes are to be ignored or considered advisory only, and no I don't care
how long some of our umbrella projects have been ignoring that fact.

....Roy




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org