The developer/community clause you suggest sounds like incubation to me, not Commons. Size is good, but I'd like to know how we measure it, or the ways in which we can measure it. I'm not looking for hard numbers, just something that states expected reasons for exit'ing, and how an exit occurs.
It is and it isn't incubation. It's that having a Commons PMC allows for the creation of reusable components that are probably too small to stand on their own. There are just some things that aren't ever going to be big enough to justify a TLP.
I believe Serf (C HTTP Client) can never be big enough to warrant being a TLP. It's home is as a reusable library. Now, if we suddenly found 4 other active HTTP Clients within the ASF and wanted to merge them under one TLP, would Serf follow? Probably. So, if HttpClient went to be its own TLP, then I'd be championing Serf to accompany it. Again, tightly-scoped functionally grouped TLPs seem to do better within the ASF than broad language-grouped TLPs.
This is something that we'd like to solidify and we'd have to see how it works out. *shrug* -- justin
