Of course, I'm fully supportive of the pTLP concept as I believe it begins to implement parts of the proposal I threw up. BTW, note there aren't a ton of options besides the recent one on the wiki proposed by Bertrand, and added to by Alan, Ant, Ross and a lot of others. Those are "concerns/issues" with the Incubator. They aren't a proposal of what to do. Someone please point me to something that's been as discussed; worked on; and that contains a responsibility transition matrix. A *lot* of thought has went into this. I'm not just whining throw out the Incubator; it sucks -- I'm saying here's a set of incremental actions that taken as a whole, or individually towards an eventual whole will still allow projects to come into our Foundation, but to do so in a way that's a more natural fit for where we want these projects to end up anyways.
I would urge the board to consider: * I've spent a great deal of time discussing the benefits and pitfalls of the approach with people at length for nearly 2 years now. So, no need to rehash those, I request folks to do research in the archives for the threads "Incubation yes, Incubator no" by Bill Rowe, anything that references the Incubator Deconstruction Proposal, etc. * pTLP are nothing different than what existed before there was an Incubator. Yes we have more projects now. So what. We'll continue to have more projects and those will eventually graduate to TLP, so we'll be in the same place. * This is an incremental step in the deconstruction proposal. We aren't saying implement the whole thing at once -- we are taking some constructive steps here (including what happened RE: discussion on the ComDev side of inheriting the docs). Let's get some data points here, report back, etc., in the vein of Apache with the small incremental, reversible change part. * The board needs to [DISCUSS] this. It's an important issue and I have a few podlings in mind already that would fit the pTLP concept. Kudos to Ross for having the courage to push this forward. Note, Ross was one of the most vocal discussers, seeing both the merit and potential pitfalls of my proposal. In short, if I've got Ross convinced enough to at least try it, then give it a chance. Cheers, Chris ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -----Original Message----- From: Ross Gardler <rgard...@opendirective.com> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> Date: Friday, June 14, 2013 6:48 AM To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Accept Stratos as an Apache Incubation Project >On 14 June 2013 14:45, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >> >> On Jun 14, 2013, at 9:31 AM, Ross Gardler <rgard...@opendirective.com> >>wrote: >> >>> Thanks for your comments Jim. >>> >>> You will see from the archives that I share most of your concerns >>> about probationary TLPs. However a number of IPMC members have argued >>> strongly for the concept. >>> >> >> To be clear, the only info that seems "official" about pTLPs >> is the Wiki page proposal: >> >> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorDeconstructionProposal >> >> IMO, it simply doesn't provide enough meat, details and rationale >> for me to be able to "commit" to it enough; there's a difference >> between the concept and the implementation of that concept. > >Agreed (and partially discussed elsewhere in this thread). > >Greg outlines a minimum he wants to see from the proposal to the >board. I agree with his minimum and will be looking to two supporters >of the pTLP concept to coordinate delivery of that minimum (I >discussed this with >both of them prior to make this suggestion, both agreed). > >Ross > > >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
