+1 On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Ross Gardler <rgard...@opendirective.com> wrote: > +1 > > Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. > On Jan 15, 2012 6:18 PM, "Joe Schaefer" <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> I wish we could get past the whole idea that we are punishing >> a podling by insisting that they take their work to say github >> instead. They probably can keep the name since we have no interest >> in it ourselves. >> >> We maintain an open-door policy for new projects, and I think that >> is a good thing that we should keep. What we lack is a sensible >> mechanism for reviewing longstanding projects in terms of their >> projected future in this place. We did NOT promise anyone free >> project hosting, and if they want that there are lots of places >> to get that. We merely provide an opportunity that with a little >> luck, hard work, and determination, they can join the ASF and >> become an Apache project. But they deserve an answer at some point. >> >> >> Purgatory is not what we were designed to offer, never. >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.moham...@gmail.com> >> > To: general@incubator.apache.org; antel...@apache.org >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 1:09 PM >> > Subject: Re: Actively retiring projects >> > >> > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:01 PM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> > Now to go back and answer Ant's question directly, >> >> >> >> Sam, what you replied doesn't really answer my question directly. The >> >> issue with the long term poddlings which I know about is not that >> >> their reports are not read, they are in fact read so something else is >> >> wrong if there is in fact a problem at all. I'm sorry that you're >> > not >> >> happy with how Kato went, as i said here [1] i expect that to be >> >> resolved shortly and they will have done that themselves rather than >> >> being pushed out by Incubator PMC which i think is a good outcome. >> >> >> >> <big snip> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Speaking as an individual Director here, but we have a board meeting >> >> > in a few days and I can obtain an Official Word™ on the matter if >> >> > that's what people here would like, but I'm highly confident >> > that the >> >> > outcome (directed at the chair) will be something along the lines of >> >> > "see to it that podling reports are adequately vetted before >> >> > forwarding them to the board" >> >> > >> >> >> >> I'd prefer to have an official response from the board on if in fact >> >> it matters if incubation takes longer than a year. Podlings like Nuvem >> >> or Wink or Photark or Kato or which ever else are just small and slow, >> >> so what? >> >> >> > >> > +1 about "... small and slow, so what?" >> > >> > It is true some podlings are just slow and small regarding attracting >> *new* >> > blood to the podling's community, but the community itself is active, and >> > IMHO it is not fair to punish them for that. >> > >> > On the other hand we still need to answer the question "OK, so till when >> we >> > should keep them in the Incubator ?" which is a very valid question, >> > honestly I don't have a definitive answer for that, but I would give a >> lead >> > to an answer/discussion in a form of a question >> > >> > "Is the Incubator the right place for such podlings ?" >> > >> > If the answer is *yes* then we should find a way to manage the increasing >> > number of accepted podling into the incubator relative to the number of >> > active/available mentors, and also we should keep a list of podlings >> which >> > are not small and they should be doing good and hence being in the >> > Incubator for some long time indicates that there is something wrong. >> > >> > If the answer is No, then: >> > - We should ask them to retire, which is not fair IMHO as I mentioned >> > above >> > - Or Can we create another level of incubtion like, which can be the >> same >> > as the normal Incubator but we can lessen down the number of initially >> > assigned mentors to 1 and recommend one of the initial committers to >> become >> > an active Mentor, provided that they have shown that they adapted to the >> > ASF rules very well. This is just a suggestion. >> > >> > Thoughts ? >> > >> > >> >> >> >> (and please note that there is no disrespect intended here. the ideas >> >> and suggestions in this thread and others recently do seem like good >> >> stuff to be trying, regardless of the age of a poddling) >> >> >> >> ...ant >> >> >> >> [1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/trurg7pnt5yk7tei >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks >> > - Mohammad Nour >> > ---- >> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep >> > moving" >> > - Albert Einstein >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
