Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Nicola Ken Barozzi
Jason van Zyl wrote: On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 12:20, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: The "Incubator Reorg" threads have brought the Incubator to the definition of a new set of rules, that aim to simplify, streamline and generally make the process of incubation more effective. It's time to wrap it up. He

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:23, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 12:20, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > > >>The "Incubator Reorg" threads have brought the Incubator to the > >>definition of a new set of rules, that aim to simplify, streamline and > >>generall

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Nicola Ken Barozzi
Jason van Zyl wrote: On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:23, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: ... In any case, if the vote is positive, we can start using the new rules and continue discussing your proposal as a next step. No, I would ask that you don't continue as my vote will not be positive and at the very leas

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:45, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:23, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > ... > >>In any case, if the vote is positive, we can start using the new rules > >>and continue discussing your proposal as a next step. > > > > No, I woul

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Greg Stein
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 03:41:55AM -0500, Jason van Zyl wrote: > On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:23, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: >... > > In any case, you are free to post anything at any time, but this vote > > will of course go on (and yes, it will last more than a couple of days, > > being so important

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Greg Stein
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 06:20:04PM +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: >... > Project spinoffs > == > > We have to reassess the status of all incubating projects WRT the new > rules, and add the needed PPMCs. > > - AltRMI: decide where it wants to land > - FTPServer: decide where it

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 09:28, Greg Stein wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 03:41:55AM -0500, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:23, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > >... > > > In any case, you are free to post anything at any time, but this vote > > > will of course go on (and yes, it will

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 09:42, Jason van Zyl wrote: > On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 09:28, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 03:41:55AM -0500, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 03:23, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > >... > > > > In any case, you are free to post anything at any time,

RE: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Greg Stein wrote: > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > Project spinoffs > > [Move all non-TLP projects to a destination PMC] > I'm unclear on this part. When you say "pass it on" or "move", are you > saying "jettison from Incubator; let the other PMC deal with it" ?? Nicola Ken appears to have decide

Re: [VOTE] New Incubator rules and scope definition (long)

2003-12-13 Thread Greg Stein
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 01:28:53PM -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote: >... > Nicola Ken appears to have decided that the Incubator will incubate only > projects intended for TLP status, and is otherwise a recording service for > other PMCs to use. In that model, it would be the Cocoon PMC's > responsib