Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> On 8/4/06, J Aaron Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > aren't "proven an actual community" and "work the standard
> > 'apache way'" graduation requirements, not entry requirements?
> > If we expect something coming into the incubator to already
> > have a fully functioning
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> You cannot put a time on how long the incubation will actually take
> because things change and you never know if the podling is actually
> meeting up to the requirements.
Readers should keep in mind that Alex also brought an existing Open Source
project, with community, to
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 08:54:09AM +0200, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >...I think recent discussion has shown quite clearly that there is quite a
> >bit
> >of disagreement on various aspects of incubation relevant to (among
> >others) the
>
On 8/11/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...I think recent discussion has shown quite clearly that there is quite a bit
of disagreement on various aspects of incubation relevant to (among others) the
wicket community...
Just to make sure this is not misinterpreted: I think Leo means
"
On thursday, someone wrote:
> this sounds perfect, and is what i pretty much suggested. i was under the
> impression that this is "frowned" upon by the apache folks
I think recent discussion has shown quite clearly that there is quite a bit
of disagreement on various aspects of incubation relevan
On 8/10/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
snip
bootstrapping a user list is discouraged. any users coming through the
apache site should be directed to the developer list during the
transitionary period whilst the incubator project is being
bootstrapped. (this does take some t
On 8/9/06, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> here is another example.
>
>> Noel J. Bergman
>> Most users should not be using Incubator code. Only those who are
> committed
>> and willing to trust that the project will do well here and eventually
>> become an ASF pr
On 8/9/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
pardon me for being so ignorant, but all i know of apache is what i read
online and what i have observed from this list.
it seems to me that there are a few recurring concerns about these items,
even in the short period that i have been subscri
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> pardon me for being so ignorant, but all i know of apache is what i read
> online and what i have observed from this list.
That is fair enough - we all start somewhere.
> it seems to me that there are a few recurring concerns about these items,
> even in the short period th
pardon me for being so ignorant, but all i know of apache is what i read
online and what i have observed from this list.
it seems to me that there are a few recurring concerns about these items,
even in the short period that i have been subscribed.
the incubation, the releases, and the user list
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> personally i am fine with "incubation takes as long as it takes" statement.
> it is your organization and it is up to you whether or not you want to let
> the project into the incubator and into graduation. i also understand the
> "need to observe open development style on ap
On 8/7/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:37 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:05:13PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> the process is democractic - graduation is by election
> ...
>> requirements are assessed democractically
> ...
>
> ple
On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:37 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:05:13PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the process is democractic - graduation is by election
...
requirements are assessed democractically
...
please stop saying democratic -- its a specific kind of
meritocrat
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
IMHO the incubator should not impose timescales or a schedule on a
project but a project may decide to impose a timescale on itself.
My thought is that a time scale would be part of the proposal. If that
proposal is voted in, it would also mean the time scale is excepted
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:05:13PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> the process is democractic - graduation is by election
...
> requirements are assessed democractically
...
please stop saying democratic -- its a specific kind of meritocratic, with
merit only measured for things done within/
IMHO the incubator should not impose timescales or a schedule on a
project but a project may decide to impose a timescale on itself.
My thought is that a time scale would be part of the proposal. If that
proposal is voted in, it would also mean the time scale is excepted
and thus - unless urgent
personally i am fine with "incubation takes as long as it takes" statement.
it is your organization and it is up to you whether or not you want to let
the project into the incubator and into graduation. i also understand the
"need to observe open development style on apache ground" argument. what
On 8/5/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/4/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> >> I understand that there are some specific circumstances in this case,
> >> but in general I believe this sort of criteria is why we get
> >> complaints th
18 matches
Mail list logo
