On 1/11/06, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is best to have it up at the wiki when sending in the proposal.. This > allows interested > people to add their names. This is just what I understood from the incubator > mailinglist > though..
It's both actually. The wiki should be drafted and maintained on a wiki, for purposes of collaboration and transparency, but the actual proposal should still be submitted to the list, so that there is a firm reference copy. Do keep in mind that the idea of a proposal implies a conventional podling incubation, where the donation would live in the Incubator repository until ready to join the ASF as either a subproject or a top-level project. During that time the Incubator PMC would serve as the podling's official PMC and approve all releases and new committers. Given the discussions here, that might be the best way to go. I just want to be sure that everyone understands that a conventional incubation of a codebase this large, that includes bringing new committers into the ASF open source community, will probably take at least a year to complete. (Witness BeeHive and Derby.) In the initial discussions (which were almost a year ago), we had envisioned bringing in only the codebase, maintaining the code with existing committers, and adding new committes only as they proved themselves in the usual way. But, a year later, that is sounding less and less like a good idea, and a conventional incubation is sounding like a better and better idea. I doubt that I will have the bandwidth this year to shepard the ADF donation through a conventional incubation that includes indoctrinating new committers. As part of drawing up the proposal, there should also be an effort to attract one or more other ASF members to this initiative to help with the incubation. -Ted.
