On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 02:00AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > The suggestion is to add it to the proposal template - that's before > incubation starts.
I think this is a great idea! > -----Original Message----- > From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:niall.pember...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 5:49 PM > To: general-incubator <general@incubator.apache.org> > Subject: Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...) > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nobody is forcing anything. > > > > > > > > Personally, I am saying RTC is destructive, and am willing to give > > every > > > > podling that message. > > > > > > If it is truly destructive, SHOULDN'T you/we be trying to force > > > something? And if not, doesn't that mean that it isn't really all > > > that destructive? > > > > > > > I believe that I represent a minority position, so no... I'm not going > > to suggest changes. I wish to forestall more projects falling into the > > RTC trap, but (at the moment) don't believe that it makes sense to > > attempt to apply mandates against RTC upon existing communities. > > > > > > > As a Director, would you consider stop approving reports from ASF > > > projects that operate under a RTC model? If not, aren't you sending > > > a mixed message? > > > > > > > I have thought about this, yes. Maybe add a question to the proposal > > template, on what form they're thinking about (and where I could > > debate the proposal against RTC). And maybe debate podlings who want > > to graduate under RTC. > > > > I think this is too late - if you want to debate it, then it needs to be when > projects enter incubation. By the time they're ready to graduate then > (presumably) things are already going well and theres less impetus to change. > > Niall > > > > > > But as a Director, if the community is producing releases, then I find > > it difficult to point to RTC as a problem for that community. It is an > > unprovable position: there is no way to state their community could be > > better off under CTR. > > > > > > > > > > - Sam Ruby > > > > > > P.S. To be clear: I am not a fan of RTC when applied to > > > release.next branches. > > > > > > I'd appreciate your explanation of this, as "most" CTR communities > > apply RTC to a branch as they prepare a release. What disturbs you > > about this approach? > > > > Cheers, > > -g > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
