On 12/30/05, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/30/05, John Fallows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Btw, after the code becomes publicly available, I'm convinced that it needs > > to spend some time in the Apache Incubator rather than trying to fast track > > it out of there too aggressively. > > If the intent is to obtain Apache accounts for several ADF developers > by virture of an Incubator proposal, then yes, the donation would have > to spend several months, perhaps even a year, in the Incubator, while > the community is indoctrinated. Of course, there is no guarantee that > the Incubator PMC will accept the proposal. > > > > Obviously we'll need to refactor the ADF Faces codebase to meet Apache > > MyFaces packaging requirements, but more importantly, there'll be an > > opportunity to gain insights from the wider MyFaces community to better > > prepare our exit from the Incubator. > > From our perspective, these sorts of things, while necessary, are > secondary. The key goal would be to determine whether the ADF > developers can continue to create and maintain the codebase over the > mailing lists, without making decisions behind closed doors, and > attract other committers to the product. > > Technicalities aside, the Incubator PMC will want to see that the > community behind the donation has become diverse. So long as the > active committers are the original ADF committers, the donation would > remain in the Incubator indefinately. Community is the prime > directive. If the community is not transparent and diverse, the > quality of the code won't matter.
Ted, I totally understand, and agree - open source is more than just, well, opening the source, and without fully open communications and an interested and involved community, this wouldn't work. -- Adam
