On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:32 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Ross Gardler <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 15/06/2011 02:11, florent andré wrote: >> >> ... >> >>> B) Doing releases : >>> Some express the need of doing release. Con expressed are related to >>> "legal engagement" of Apache in such release and the necessary oversee >>> of already really busy mentors. >> >> This misses the original point for not allowing releases. Labs is not >> intended to be a way of "routing around" the incubator. >> >> It also misses the point that labs is not supposed to be producing usable >> code, it's a place for fast fail experiments. Usable code should go through >> incubation. >> >>> C) Include non Apache's commiter (let's call them Externals) : >>> Ant propose this but the answer was "it's not possible" [1] because : >>> - Externals have to sign a CLA >>> - Will accept Externals as commiter >>> >>> Well, this is what is done is no problems during a new incubator >>> project... Where is the problem here ? >> >> If we make the rules the same as the incubator why have labs at all? This is >> supposed to be a simple, no commitment playground for people who have earned >> merit. It is *explicitly* not a place for creating new communities. >> >>> Here comes two more personal POV, idea, whatever : >>> >>> - labs like an idea box : >>> From my point of view - may be false - actual labs is more a "write >>> code place" than an express, discussion, grow and develop ideas place. >>> May a way to write some (visible from labs site) webpages, have a wiki >>> for idea expression could be good... Some others tools can be imagined. >> >> It's not the incubator, why do we want to make it like the incubator? >> >> Personally I really like the fact there are almost no rules around here. If >> I want to do something with my fellow committers I just ask for a lab and >> its done (I've never owned a lab, but I have contributed to a couple and >> used a couple). If I want to do something with a broader community then I go >> to the incubator or offsite. I really don't see the problem. >> >> I don't want to see labs go into the attic but I don't want to see it gather >> a whole raft of rules that prevent me people from freely experimenting the >> way it is intended. >> > > The main purposes of the Incubator are about IP clearance and learning > how to run a project in The Apache Way with community building etc. > The Labs guideline that 'Labs is not intended to be a way of "routing > around" the incubator.' to me relates to those two things. If one or > more people work on a Lab they don't necessarily need to be doing it > The Apache Way, and if they have submitted a CLA and aren't violating > that then there shouldn't be IP issues, so if a Lab did a release I > don't think it would necessarily imply "routing around" the incubator. > > I also don't see how following the normal Apache processes for things > like committers or releases sees Labs "gather a whole raft of rules" > it looks more like the opposite to me - Labs has come up with a whole > raft of rules to prevent Labs doing things and thats one of (just one > of) the reasons people are going elsewhere. > > IMHO if the Labs rules were simplified and more innovative or even > experimental ways were found to fit in with the ASF then that would > help make it more vibrant. Why not just give it a try!
My question would be, if why not do what you want in the incubator where there aren't the restrictions that Labs currently has? Niall > ...ant > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
