You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com> on 2006/06/26 20:57:32 UTC
Branding of Incubator projects
So, the guide that I'm "tackling" is the "Podling Branding" guide.
Here's what I'm proposing after some feedback from others here in Dublin:
----
Podlings are, by definition, not yet fully accepted as part of the
Apache Software Foundation. Therefore, they are subject to additional
branding constraints.
1. The podling MUST be referred to as "Apache <Podling>" AND mention
that the project is under Incubation. Suitable mentions are:
- Inclusion of the http://incubator.apache.org/<podling> URL
- The statement that "Apache <Podling> is currently undergoing
Incubation at the Apache Software Foundation."
These statements only need to be disclosed upon the first reference in
a document.
2. Podling web sites MUST include a clear disclaimer on their website
and in all documentation (including releases) stating that they are in
incubation. Podlings SHOULD use the following text for all
disclaimers:
----
<project name> is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the <name of sponsor>.
Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further
review indicates that the infrastructure, communications, and decision
making process have stabilized in a manner consistent with other
successful ASF projects. While incubation status is not necessarily a
reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it does
indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
----
Podlings wishing to use a different disclaimer message MUST have the
disclaimer approved by the Incubator PMC prior to use.
3. Podlings websites SHOULD contain the Apache Incubator Project logo
as sign of affiliation.
4. Podlings MUST coordinate with the Apache PRC on all publicity
activities by a podling.
5. Until the Incubator PMC approves a podling proposal *and* the
podling initial drop code is in our source code repositories, a
project or any affiliated persons SHOULD NOT issue any 'press
releases' or affirmatively seek positive publicity (such as 'seeding
news stories') .
6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
7. The Incubator PMC MAY consider the termination of a project for
violation of these branding guidelines.
----
If no one comes up with a better policy by tomorrow morning Dublin
time, that's what the guide is going to say for now. =)
Thanks! -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 01:11:15PM -0700, Roy Fielding wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2006, at 11:57 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> >So, the guide that I'm "tackling" is the "Podling Branding" guide.
>
> It would be nice to tackle the still-nonexistant Apache branding
> guide as well. That way you could link to it from this doc.
Well, sure. ;-)
> +1. Note that we used to be "The Jackrabbit project of Apache
> Incubator"
> prior to graduation as "Apache Jackrabbit", but that led to a lot of
> documentation needing to be changed at graduation.
Right. That's why we want the podlings to be called "Apache Jackrabbit" from
the beginning.
> On other notes, please spell out PRC as public relations committee.
> PRC and PMC are so similar that my eyes confuse the two while reading
> a bunch of acronyms.
Done.
Thanks. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Jun 26, 2006, at 11:57 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> So, the guide that I'm "tackling" is the "Podling Branding" guide.
It would be nice to tackle the still-nonexistant Apache branding
guide as well. That way you could link to it from this doc.
> Here's what I'm proposing after some feedback from others here in
> Dublin:
>
> ----
>
> Podlings are, by definition, not yet fully accepted as part of the
> Apache Software Foundation. Therefore, they are subject to additional
> branding constraints.
>
> 1. The podling MUST be referred to as "Apache <Podling>" AND mention
> that the project is under Incubation. Suitable mentions are:
>
> - Inclusion of the http://incubator.apache.org/<podling> URL
> - The statement that "Apache <Podling> is currently undergoing
> Incubation at the Apache Software Foundation."
>
> These statements only need to be disclosed upon the first reference in
> a document.
+1. Note that we used to be "The Jackrabbit project of Apache
Incubator"
prior to graduation as "Apache Jackrabbit", but that led to a lot of
documentation needing to be changed at graduation.
On other notes, please spell out PRC as public relations committee.
PRC and PMC are so similar that my eyes confuse the two while reading
a bunch of acronyms.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 08:59:37AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> [ Hi, this message doesn't seem to be going through - I'd appreciate it
> if you'd forward it on, or quote it in a reply, in the hope that
> whatever is causing mail problems sorts itself out today. Thanks! ]
>
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> >Podlings are, by definition, not yet fully accepted as part of the
> >Apache Software Foundation. Therefore, they are subject to additional
> > branding constraints.
>
> >1. The podling MUST be referred to as "Apache <Podling>"
>
> If you take the 'view from 10000 feet up', this just doesn't clarify
> things at all. I think it would be simpler and clearer to not allow
> people to utilize the term Apache until the project is fully integrated
> into Apache. Starting to use the term 'Apache' also makes it more
> difficult for people to back out, which shouldn't actually be a "bad"
> thing, nor difficult for them or us.
The issue is that if we don't do that, then there is no tie to Apache when the
project graduates. After all, the purpose of Incubation is to establish the
Apache-style community. I really think having the podlings use the Apache name
is part of the tradeoff we make by opening ourselves up for new projects.
If the podling 'fails', then they don't get to use the name.
This question came up in our discussions here about Kabuki. Would we permit
Zimbra to reuse the Kabuki name? That was an open question that doesn't have a
real clear answer. It's a lot clearer if the project refers to itself as
"Apache Kabuki" from the beginning. (But, per the suggestion from Susan, we
wouldn't call it that until the podling is approved, lists created, and code
checked in - which never happened.)
My $.02. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
[ Hi, this message doesn't seem to be going through - I'd appreciate it
if you'd forward it on, or quote it in a reply, in the hope that
whatever is causing mail problems sorts itself out today. Thanks! ]
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Podlings are, by definition, not yet fully accepted as part of the
> Apache Software Foundation. Therefore, they are subject to additional
> branding constraints.
> 1. The podling MUST be referred to as "Apache <Podling>"
If you take the 'view from 10000 feet up', this just doesn't clarify
things at all. I think it would be simpler and clearer to not allow
people to utilize the term Apache until the project is fully integrated
into Apache. Starting to use the term 'Apache' also makes it more
difficult for people to back out, which shouldn't actually be a "bad"
thing, nor difficult for them or us.
--
David N. Welton
- http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Linux, Open Source Consulting
- http://www.dedasys.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 12:42:54PM -0700, sophitia que wrote:
> I would also propose:
>
> The PRC is willing to issue formal press releases for all podlings who
> successfully graduate from the Incubator and are interested in issuing a
> press release. See below...
>
> >
> >
> >5. Until the Incubator PMC approves a podling proposal *and* the
> >podling initial drop code is in our source code repositories, a
> >project or any affiliated persons SHOULD NOT issue any 'press
> >releases' or affirmatively seek positive publicity (such as 'seeding
> >news stories') .
>
>
>
> I would amend, as I see three stages:
> Podling is in proposal/or pre-code-drop process: No press whatsoever. Not
> allowed to call a project by Apache Foo name until project is officially in
> incubation and code has been submitted into repositories.
>
> Podling has been approved for incubation/podling has launched dev mailing
> lists / podling has dropped code into repository: Project and affiliated
> persons can issue press releases that reference the podling, but cannot
> issue press releases with the specific intent of announcing the Podling.
> Podling can conduct informal pr activities, such as media outreach, blog
> publicity, etc.
>
> Podling has been approved to graduate from the incubator: Formal press
> release, issued by the ASF. Or jointly by the ASF and any affiliated
> organizations/groups.
I think this is goodness and incorporated it into the draft just
checked in.
Thanks. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On 6/26/06, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm left very unclear about what is allowed in a press release and
> what isn't. Examples might be helpful. Based on my confusion, I
> also don't understand why a press release saying that project X is
> starting incubation with community members x1, x2, x3, etc would be
> undesirable as long is it makes the incubation status clear.
Personally, I think it's undesireable to have podlings sending out a
"hey, look at us" press releases just from the fact that it encourages
companies to use the incubator as a way to generate good press, as
opposed to as a way to build a useful self sustaining community. Let
them wait until they've actually built a community and a product
before they do that sort of thing. And no, before anyone asks, I
don't think not sending out a press release is likely to make it
harder to build that community. The type of people who are useful
contributors are seldom the type who hear about these kind of things
from a press release.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jun 26, 2006, at 12:42 PM, sophitia que wrote:
> I would also propose:
>
> The PRC is willing to issue formal press releases for all podlings who
> successfully graduate from the Incubator and are interested in
> issuing a
> press release. See below...
>
>>
>>
>> 5. Until the Incubator PMC approves a podling proposal *and* the
>> podling initial drop code is in our source code repositories, a
>> project or any affiliated persons SHOULD NOT issue any 'press
>> releases' or affirmatively seek positive publicity (such as 'seeding
>> news stories') .
>
>
>
> I would amend, as I see three stages:
> Podling is in proposal/or pre-code-drop process: No press
> whatsoever. Not
> allowed to call a project by Apache Foo name until project is
> officially in
> incubation and code has been submitted into repositories.
>
> Podling has been approved for incubation/podling has launched dev
> mailing
> lists / podling has dropped code into repository: Project and
> affiliated
> persons can issue press releases that reference the podling, but
> cannot
> issue press releases with the specific intent of announcing the
> Podling.
> Podling can conduct informal pr activities, such as media outreach,
> blog
> publicity, etc.
I'm left very unclear about what is allowed in a press release and
what isn't. Examples might be helpful. Based on my confusion, I
also don't understand why a press release saying that project X is
starting incubation with community members x1, x2, x3, etc would be
undesirable as long is it makes the incubation status clear.
thanks
david jencks
>
> Podling has been approved to graduate from the incubator: Formal press
> release, issued by the ASF. Or jointly by the ASF and any affiliated
> organizations/groups.
>
> Susan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by sophitia que <so...@gmail.com>.
I would also propose:
The PRC is willing to issue formal press releases for all podlings who
successfully graduate from the Incubator and are interested in issuing a
press release. See below...
>
>
> 5. Until the Incubator PMC approves a podling proposal *and* the
> podling initial drop code is in our source code repositories, a
> project or any affiliated persons SHOULD NOT issue any 'press
> releases' or affirmatively seek positive publicity (such as 'seeding
> news stories') .
I would amend, as I see three stages:
Podling is in proposal/or pre-code-drop process: No press whatsoever. Not
allowed to call a project by Apache Foo name until project is officially in
incubation and code has been submitted into repositories.
Podling has been approved for incubation/podling has launched dev mailing
lists / podling has dropped code into repository: Project and affiliated
persons can issue press releases that reference the podling, but cannot
issue press releases with the specific intent of announcing the Podling.
Podling can conduct informal pr activities, such as media outreach, blog
publicity, etc.
Podling has been approved to graduate from the incubator: Formal press
release, issued by the ASF. Or jointly by the ASF and any affiliated
organizations/groups.
Susan
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 08:56:56PM +0100, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>> * Apache Incubating Project <podling>
>>
>> * Apache <podling> Incubating Project
>
> We (Cliff, Robert, Noel, Noirin and myself) discussed some of these options
> here beforehand, and we felt that having a project rename itself upon
> graduation is unwieldly.
I agree with this point completely. Not having to reorganize the entire doc set
upon graduation is a big win. As long as we have a clear method that identifies
incubation efforts without causing pain at the transition, sounds good to me.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 08:56:56PM +0100, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >1. The podling MUST be referred to as "Apache <Podling>" AND mention
> >that the project is under Incubation. Suitable mentions are:
> >
> > - Inclusion of the http://incubator.apache.org/<podling> URL
> > - The statement that "Apache <Podling> is currently undergoing
> >Incubation at the Apache Software Foundation."
>
> I'd offer two alternative (and certainly not your proposal)
>
> * Apache Incubating Project <podling>
>
> * Apache <podling> Incubating Project
We (Cliff, Robert, Noel, Noirin and myself) discussed some of these options
here beforehand, and we felt that having a project rename itself upon
graduation is unwieldly. Therefore, the current proposal is what we felt was
best.
> No other forms would be acceptable, period. Your proposal leaves editors
> and reporters free to drop the second sentence.
Yes, others can drop the second sentence (they always can); but it should
always be on any materials that are produced by the folks who are affiliated
with the podling. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> So, the guide that I'm "tackling" is the "Podling Branding" guide.
>
> Here's what I'm proposing after some feedback from others here in Dublin:
>
> ----
>
> Podlings are, by definition, not yet fully accepted as part of the
> Apache Software Foundation. Therefore, they are subject to additional
> branding constraints.
>
> 1. The podling MUST be referred to as "Apache <Podling>" AND mention
> that the project is under Incubation. Suitable mentions are:
>
> - Inclusion of the http://incubator.apache.org/<podling> URL
> - The statement that "Apache <Podling> is currently undergoing
> Incubation at the Apache Software Foundation."
I'd offer two alternative (and certainly not your proposal)
* Apache Incubating Project <podling>
* Apache <podling> Incubating Project
No other forms would be acceptable, period. Your proposal leaves editors
and reporters free to drop the second sentence.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>.
On 29.06.2006, at 12:11, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 6/29/06, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
>> I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
>> exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
>> seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
>> announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
>> may be.)
>
> Podlings are not to be generated for the purpose of publicity.
> Therefore, they can and should be barred from 'positive publicity'
> until they have been accepted, lists created, and submitted a code
> base. If a podling violates these rules, I want to see them
> terminated and I want the ASF to issue a counter-release saying that
> the project is terminated due to violations in our branding
> guidelines.
>
> We have had way way way too many problems with podlings seeking
> publicity when they had no code yet. Kabuki is just the latest
> example - right after being accepted, IBM/Zimbra issued a PR - but
> they then silently went away after getting all that free publicity for
> their company. The ASF Incubator PMC should not condone actions around
> smoke and mirrors. If a podling doesn't like that policy, they are
> free to find another home. Now, the policy is public for all to see.
+1.
Cheers,
Erik
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>.
+1
On Jun 29, 2006, at 3:11 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> We have had way way way too many problems with podlings seeking
> publicity when they had no code yet. Kabuki is just the latest
> example - right after being accepted, IBM/Zimbra issued a PR - but
> they then silently went away after getting all that free publicity for
> their company. The ASF Incubator PMC should not condone actions around
> smoke and mirrors. If a podling doesn't like that policy, they are
> free to find another home. Now, the policy is public for all to see.
> -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 6/29/06, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
> I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
> exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
> seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
> announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
> may be.)
Podlings are not to be generated for the purpose of publicity.
Therefore, they can and should be barred from 'positive publicity'
until they have been accepted, lists created, and submitted a code
base. If a podling violates these rules, I want to see them
terminated and I want the ASF to issue a counter-release saying that
the project is terminated due to violations in our branding
guidelines.
We have had way way way too many problems with podlings seeking
publicity when they had no code yet. Kabuki is just the latest
example - right after being accepted, IBM/Zimbra issued a PR - but
they then silently went away after getting all that free publicity for
their company. The ASF Incubator PMC should not condone actions around
smoke and mirrors. If a podling doesn't like that policy, they are
free to find another home. Now, the policy is public for all to see.
-- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/30/06, robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/29/06, sophitia que <so...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
> > 6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
> > > > inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
> > >
> > > I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
> > > exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
> > > seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
> > > announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
> > > may be.)
> >
> >
> > Inaccurate may be an imprecise word. Perhaps we should
> > s/inaccurate/unapproved of and factually incorrect.
>
>
> +1
>
> (unless there are any objections) i'll change the language
>
now reads:
"
Publicity activities
------------------------
Podlings MUST coordinate with the Apache Public Relations Committee on
all publicity activities by a podling.
The open source space can be difficult
to negotiate even for experienced professionals. The Apache Public
Relations
Committee understands this space and it is in the best interests of all
that they are consulted.
Response to Unapproved Statements
----------------------------------------------------
The Apache Public Relations Committee SHALL affirmatively and publicly
respond to any unapproved statements surrounding podlings which are
factually
incorrect.
"
please post suggested improvements
some of the comments in this thread will inform a separate 'entry to
incubator' guide but i think that the above should remain where they are and
be linked.
- robert
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/29/06, sophitia que <so...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > While I don't necessarily disagree with this guideline it doesn't
> > seem that it belongs here. Until a project is accepted no formal
> > relationship between the proposer and the ASF exists (right?), so
> > this guideline cannot be enforced or even expected to be known to
> > the proposing party. (It only seems to apply to the typically
> > narrow window between the acceptance of a project and the code
> > drop.)
> >
>
> I disagree that this guideline can not expected to be known by the
> proposing
> party. Would you not agree that there is some minimum amount of due
> diligence required to submit a proposal? For example, it's become
> standard
> that people use a certain general model or template to submit their
> proposals. (We are now trying to create an official template, but the last
> X
> submissions have largely followed the same unofficial pattern).
>
> I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
> least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
> submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure that
> any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly displayed
> on
> the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural processes that
> reinforce these practices.
+1
> > 6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
> > > inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
> >
> > I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
> > exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
> > seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
> > announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
> > may be.)
>
>
> Inaccurate may be an imprecise word. Perhaps we should
> s/inaccurate/unapproved of and factually incorrect.
+1
(unless there are any objections) i'll change the language
This also seems like a catch 22. Until a proposal has been accepted
> > there is no podling to speak of, so the proposer can do whatever
> > they want (including put out a press release announcing it). And
>
>
> Theoretically, a proposer could put out a press release announcing a
> podling before a proposal was submitted (and in fact, this has happened in
> the past). Practically speaking, we can't prevent this from happening.
> But
> if a proposer were to do this, the proposer would receive a highly
> negative
> response from the community. We want to prevent such things from happening
> -
> we want to increase the likelihood that any relationship between the ASF
> and
> its ecosystem will be fruitful from the very start.
+1
The purpose of these guidelines is that we are trying to codify informal
> policies and procedures that are already in place, and make these clear
> and
> concise to our community. The problem with informal policies and
> procedures
> is that there all of these unspoken expectations from members of the
> community about what *should* happen, but then newcomers to the community
> have no idea what these expectations are, and then understandably are
> confused/upset/etc when we punish them (either implicitly or explicitly)
> for
> violating these expectations.
+1
- robert
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/30/06, robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/29/06, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
>
> > sophitia que wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
> > > least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
> > > submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure
> > that
> > > any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly
> > displayed on
> > > the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural processes
> > that
> > > reinforce these practices.
> >
> > I agree. Listing these guidelines or recommendations in a document
> > (or a section of one) specifically designated for third parties
> > wishing to propose a project will be a big help. IMO, the section
> > named Entry To Incubation of the Incubation would be a good place.
> > The Branding Guidelines is where I would tend to look for guidance
> > after my proposal has been accepted but not necessarily until then.
>
>
> interesting...
>
> i'd hope that proposers would read all of the incubator documentation and
> a reasonable percentage of the foundation documentation. perhaps i was being
> optimisitic :-/
>
> a separate entry to incubator document sounds like a good idea.
>
(Doh! sent too early)
but with links into branding and the other documents rather than move the
content.
- robert
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/29/06, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
>
> sophitia que wrote:
> [...]
> > I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
> > least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
> > submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure
> that
> > any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly displayed
> on
> > the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural processes that
> > reinforce these practices.
>
> I agree. Listing these guidelines or recommendations in a document
> (or a section of one) specifically designated for third parties
> wishing to propose a project will be a big help. IMO, the section
> named Entry To Incubation of the Incubation would be a good place.
> The Branding Guidelines is where I would tend to look for guidance
> after my proposal has been accepted but not necessarily until then.
interesting...
i'd hope that proposers would read all of the incubator documentation and a
reasonable percentage of the foundation documentation. perhaps i was being
optimisitic :-/
a separate entry to incubator document sounds like a good idea.
- robert
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
sophitia que wrote:
[...]
> I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
> least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
> submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure that
> any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly displayed on
> the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural processes that
> reinforce these practices.
I agree. Listing these guidelines or recommendations in a document
(or a section of one) specifically designated for third parties
wishing to propose a project will be a big help. IMO, the section
named Entry To Incubation of the Incubation would be a good place.
The Branding Guidelines is where I would tend to look for guidance
after my proposal has been accepted but not necessarily until then.
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/29/06, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
<snip>
I will be submitting a proposal soon, and have followed the form of the
> most recent submissions. Will
> this discussion have material impact on the form of a submission in the
> next few weeks?
of course :-)
the mailing lists are the primary method of communication at apache.
opinions are formed and changed on list. codification (if it happens) of any
consensus (that emerges) is necessarily later.
but the aim of the documentation effort is codification. if the proposal
follows the conventional format already, there shouldn't be any surprises.
please feel free to dive into the documentation threads with comments and
suggestions: the documents being developed are aimed at those creating
proposals.
- robert
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
From below: "For example, it's become standard that people use a
certain general model or template to submit their
proposals. (We are now trying to create an official template, but the
last X submissions have largely followed the same unofficial pattern).
I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure
that any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly
displayed on the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural
processes that reinforce these practices."
....
I will be submitting a proposal soon, and have followed the form of the
most recent submissions. Will
this discussion have material impact on the form of a submission in the
next few weeks?
Carl.
sophitia que wrote:
>> While I don't necessarily disagree with this guideline it doesn't
>> seem that it belongs here. Until a project is accepted no formal
>> relationship between the proposer and the ASF exists (right?), so
>> this guideline cannot be enforced or even expected to be known to
>> the proposing party. (It only seems to apply to the typically
>> narrow window between the acceptance of a project and the code
>> drop.)
>>
>
> I disagree that this guideline can not expected to be known by the
> proposing
> party. Would you not agree that there is some minimum amount of due
> diligence required to submit a proposal? For example, it's become
> standard
> that people use a certain general model or template to submit their
> proposals. (We are now trying to create an official template, but the
> last X
> submissions have largely followed the same unofficial pattern).
>
> I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
> least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
> submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure that
> any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly
> displayed on
> the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural processes that
> reinforce these practices.
>
>
>>
>> > 6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
>> > inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
>>
>> I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
>> exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
>> seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
>> announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
>> may be.)
>
>
> Inaccurate may be an imprecise word. Perhaps we should
> s/inaccurate/unapproved of and factually incorrect.
>
> This also seems like a catch 22. Until a proposal has been accepted
>> there is no podling to speak of, so the proposer can do whatever
>> they want (including put out a press release announcing it). And
>
>
> Theoretically, a proposer could put out a press release announcing a
> podling before a proposal was submitted (and in fact, this has
> happened in
> the past). Practically speaking, we can't prevent this from
> happening. But
> if a proposer were to do this, the proposer would receive a highly
> negative
> response from the community. We want to prevent such things from
> happening -
> we want to increase the likelihood that any relationship between the
> ASF and
> its ecosystem will be fruitful from the very start.
>
> The purpose of these guidelines is that we are trying to codify informal
> policies and procedures that are already in place, and make these
> clear and
> concise to our community. The problem with informal policies and
> procedures
> is that there all of these unspoken expectations from members of the
> community about what *should* happen, but then newcomers to the community
> have no idea what these expectations are, and then understandably are
> confused/upset/etc when we punish them (either implicitly or
> explicitly) for
> violating these expectations.
>
> Speaking with PRC hat,
> Susan
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by sophitia que <so...@gmail.com>.
> While I don't necessarily disagree with this guideline it doesn't
> seem that it belongs here. Until a project is accepted no formal
> relationship between the proposer and the ASF exists (right?), so
> this guideline cannot be enforced or even expected to be known to
> the proposing party. (It only seems to apply to the typically
> narrow window between the acceptance of a project and the code
> drop.)
>
I disagree that this guideline can not expected to be known by the proposing
party. Would you not agree that there is some minimum amount of due
diligence required to submit a proposal? For example, it's become standard
that people use a certain general model or template to submit their
proposals. (We are now trying to create an official template, but the last X
submissions have largely followed the same unofficial pattern).
I don't think it's unreasonable that we expect proposing parties to at
least browse and read parts of the incubator web site prior to a
submission. Our obligation, as the incubator, would be to 1) ensure that
any official guidelines we develop are prominently and visibly displayed on
the incubator web site, 2) promote community and cultural processes that
reinforce these practices.
>
> > 6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
> > inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
>
> I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
> exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
> seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
> announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
> may be.)
Inaccurate may be an imprecise word. Perhaps we should
s/inaccurate/unapproved of and factually incorrect.
This also seems like a catch 22. Until a proposal has been accepted
> there is no podling to speak of, so the proposer can do whatever
> they want (including put out a press release announcing it). And
Theoretically, a proposer could put out a press release announcing a
podling before a proposal was submitted (and in fact, this has happened in
the past). Practically speaking, we can't prevent this from happening. But
if a proposer were to do this, the proposer would receive a highly negative
response from the community. We want to prevent such things from happening -
we want to increase the likelihood that any relationship between the ASF and
its ecosystem will be fruitful from the very start.
The purpose of these guidelines is that we are trying to codify informal
policies and procedures that are already in place, and make these clear and
concise to our community. The problem with informal policies and procedures
is that there all of these unspoken expectations from members of the
community about what *should* happen, but then newcomers to the community
have no idea what these expectations are, and then understandably are
confused/upset/etc when we punish them (either implicitly or explicitly) for
violating these expectations.
Speaking with PRC hat,
Susan
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 6/29/06, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
[...]
> if this document doesn't work in it's current form, please post your
> proposed improvements so we can all take a look (that goes for everyone BTW
> :-)
I see no problem with the rest of the document. My only concern
or objection is with bullets 5 and 6. I would strike bullet 6
altogether (since it imposes a requirement on the PRC, not on
podlings), and reword bullet 5 like so:
5. Any press releases or similar public announcements regarding
new project proposals or newly accepted podlings are discouraged
until the proposal has been accepted by the Incubator PMC *and*
the project codebase has been imported into the ASF source code
repository.
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 6/29/06, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
>
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> [...]
> > 5. Until the Incubator PMC approves a podling proposal *and* the
> > podling initial drop code is in our source code repositories, a
> > project or any affiliated persons SHOULD NOT issue any 'press
> > releases' or affirmatively seek positive publicity (such as 'seeding
> > news stories') .
>
> While I don't necessarily disagree with this guideline it doesn't
> seem that it belongs here. Until a project is accepted no formal
> relationship between the proposer and the ASF exists (right?), so
> this guideline cannot be enforced or even expected to be known to
> the proposing party.
there are no effective sanctions. the electorate are free apply their own
personal criteria.
i would expect anyone thinking of proposing a project to RTFM which is what
we're trying to write.
(It only seems to apply to the typically
> narrow window between the acceptance of a project and the code
> drop.)
unfortunately too often these windows which are too long. press attention
during this period just makes things more difficult for us.
the right time to seek press is when the source has been dropped. prior to
that the project doesn't really exist.
press announcements have (sometimes) proved highly effective in creating
interest but the easiest way to lose momentum is to have loads of
enthusiatic people show up only to be told the project isn't ready yet.
> 6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
> > inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
>
> I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
> exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
> seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
> announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
> may be.)
announcing that a proposal has been submitted is accurate (and fine by me)
but it's not accurate to say that a codebase has moved to apache at this
stage.
these announcements have proved a sensitive issue for the community and so
this distinction is important. the incubator has a open and democractic
process. it's not good for voters to read in the press announcements of the
result before the election has happened.
This also seems like a catch 22. Until a proposal has been accepted
> there is no podling to speak of, so the proposer can do whatever
> they want (including put out a press release announcing it).
And I don't see anything wrong with doing that (although I suspect
> that most companies will want to avoid any press until their
> proposal has been accepted). I guess I'm missing the point of
> this bullet (the ASF PRC can respond to any PR in any case).
the document is just a means to an end. too many corporate PR teams really
don't understand this space. they keep doing stupid things that annoy us and
rebound badly on themselves.
there are people here that understand the open source space. we need
organisations considering a proposal who are likely to garner press interest
to work with the public relations committee here.
it'd be great if they could also avoid the known pitfalls without having to
contact the apache public relations team.
if this document doesn't work in it's current form, please post your
proposed improvements so we can all take a look (that goes for everyone BTW
:-)
- robert
Re: Branding of Incubator projects
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
[...]
> 5. Until the Incubator PMC approves a podling proposal *and* the
> podling initial drop code is in our source code repositories, a
> project or any affiliated persons SHOULD NOT issue any 'press
> releases' or affirmatively seek positive publicity (such as 'seeding
> news stories') .
While I don't necessarily disagree with this guideline it doesn't
seem that it belongs here. Until a project is accepted no formal
relationship between the proposer and the ASF exists (right?), so
this guideline cannot be enforced or even expected to be known to
the proposing party. (It only seems to apply to the typically
narrow window between the acceptance of a project and the code
drop.)
>
> 6. The Apache PRC SHALL affirmatively and publicly respond to any such
> inaccurate publicity surrounding podlings.
I'm not quite comfortable with the word inaccurate here. What
exactly does it refer to? (Assuming it's bullet 5, there doesn't
seem anything inaccurate about putting out a press release
announcing the proposal of a project, ill-advised though it
may be.)
This also seems like a catch 22. Until a proposal has been accepted
there is no podling to speak of, so the proposer can do whatever
they want (including put out a press release announcing it). And
I don't see anything wrong with doing that (although I suspect
that most companies will want to avoid any press until their
proposal has been accepted). I guess I'm missing the point of
this bullet (the ASF PRC can respond to any PR in any case).
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org