On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:11, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org> wrote: > Hi Greg, > > I am not on either side of the debate here, but Martijn is correct in > pointing that the formal standard was applied to *all* podlings to date.
I understand, and will simply ask "was that the right thing to do?" I'm not looking for an answer. That's the past, so I'm unconcerned. I'm merely (selfishly, TBH) concerned about Subversion, and making any IPMC adjustments for future podlings who may end up in similar circumstances. > There's more than a few projects in the ASF that were originally developed > in the open, with strong communities. And in those cases that I am aware of, > no amount of reasoning from those projects would convince the IPMC to give > them a break and just let them in. You'd have to sit in limbo forever until > you are done with the checklist. Yup. And I'll note that that "limbo" you describe has been an issue with the Board for a long while now. That is why the Board instructed the IPMC to request all podlings to list two items in their reports: 1) when did you arrive? 2) what is left? Specifically to focus the podling (and the IPMC) on the question of "WHY are you still in the Incubator?" Podlings should be shepherded *out* rather than held *in*. > So I am fine if SVN incubation would result in reasonable changes in those > incubator policies. Unless whoever was behind those policies in the first > place will step in and object? Where I see something that does not make sense [for Subversion, obviously; I don't know what may/not make sense for other podlings], then yes: I intend to clarify that problem. I hope that my intent to request a waiver of "standard procedure" will point out where that procedure breaks down for certain podlings. The IPMC can then discuss it as a whole and update process as appropriate. But I say "as appropriate". Sometimes it just doesn't make sense to document every possible exception. But simply to note *they can exist*. I mean, really... how many other projects that are 9.5 years old(*) do we expect to see arriving here? And of those, how many *started* with the ideas and precepts of the Apache Software Foundation? I suspect it will be zero, so wasting a lot of time documenting (rather than recognizing) exceptions might not be very useful. Cheers, -g (*) Subversion coding was started in June 2000, one year after the ASF itself was founded; svn started as a concept around the end of 1999 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
