If I am not mistaken there is no relationship with the sponsoring PMC, which in my view needs to change (as you indirectly point out).
There are a couple of things : 1) The incubated project doesn't even need to know about the sponsoring project 2) The sponsoring project doesn't even have to know about the project being sponsored (even as VP I was at one point unaware that Jakarta was sponsoring a project in the Incubator) 3) A big bang integration after a project ends up in the sponsoring project, isn't a good start and there probable needs to be a closer defined relationship between the two. Should people on the IPMC also be on the sponsoring PMC ? (assuming the PMC != committers) 4) To give an example : is Brett (in his role of being a mentor) representing the Maven PMC or on a "personal" basis and is there or should there be a difference between the 2 ? 5) What's the use of having a vote on sponsoring a project in the Incubator if no one is volunteering to represent the sponsoring project ? Sorry for hijacking your question :) Lot's of questions, no time for answers (yet) :) Mvgr, Martin Brett Porter wrote: > Hi, > > Quick question (I hope). I was thinking about what will happen if the > NMaven podling would like to add a committer, make a release, etc. > > Would votes by Maven PMC members (As the sponsoring project) be > considered binding in this case, or should we have IPMC members? > > We currently only have 2 IPMC members on the project, so I was going > to ask for an additional mentor anyway, but I feel like the > appropriate people to be casting votes should be Maven PMC folk. > > Thoughts? > > Cheers, > Brett > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
