Re: discussion of release of Apache Wicket 1.3.0-incubating-alpha

[Craig L Russell]

Hi Niclas,

On Apr 4, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:

On Thursday 05 April 2007 05:08, Craig L Russell wrote:

I have a hard time understanding how a podling can consider itself
ready for graduation without having anything worth sharing, and don't
understand what the point is of having an audit of anything short of
a build artifact.

Assuming for a second that you are not speaking of Wicket;


kreti & pleti, the general public.

A podling is ready to graduate when the community operates TheApacheWay and has cleared the legal hurdles, not when it has something that can be used by

I was very very careful to use the words "without having anything worth sharing" by which I do not mean the hoi polloi. Sharing work efforts doesn't mean shrink-wrapped. But please send a link to the meaning of kreti & pleti! I love learning new idioms and it's not in the first 20 Google hits. :-(

Often the "usefulness" comes before the community and legalities, but from the

Incubator's point of view, it is not a concern.

I agree. The Incubator is responsible for guiding the podling in the Apache Way and not for passing judgement on the usefulness of the podlings' efforts. That's best judged by the community.

expected from Apache projects.

So, I would claim that it is definately a positive sign that a podling is able to cut a 'non-functional' release, or a 'functional' release that explicitly will not be supported, future-proof and having other qualities typically

I agree. That's how I understand what the "incubating" disclaimers are all about. "Take a look if you like, use it if you choose, but don't assume it's going to be any better than it is right now." But I was specifically objecting to a proposal that a release audit would be a good addition to the incubator process:

IMHO we need to alter the process so that we have an explicit audit
when the community feels (by vote) that it has a build process in
place. the code doesn't need to be ready but the build does and the
codebase needs to be ready for audit.

- robert

I'm wondering if there really is a need for YAP (yet another process) to handle a release by a podling. There are lots of ways of labeling a podling release, and you can indicate whether you want folks to try it out or just look at its release artifacts. But it still has to look like a release with disclaimers, licenses, and ip clearances completed.

For what it's worth,



Regards,

Craig

I think the incubator is really more concerned about a podling that appears to claim it's a real Apache project when it's still just in incubation. Speaking specifically of Wicket now, I think it's great that the community has progressed to the point of wanting to demonstrate that they know how to release stuff, even though it isn't ready for general use. And I think that 1.3.0-incubating-alpha has enough disclaimers in it to scare off most casual prospective users. +1 for going through the release process for Wicket with the disclaimers that the Wicket team has discussed... It looks like they are "getting it".

Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer

I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature