I saw that some people are concerned about the project's heavy use of AI in development, and whether this model can really build a genuine community.
But I think this is exactly why the ASF Incubator is meaningful. We do not really know whether this development model can be sustainable in the long term, or whether it challenges some of ASF's existing ideas and principles. That is precisely why it is worth exploring. On one hand, ASF seems to have few general-purpose agent projects today, so bringing in something new in this area may have value and is worth experimenting with. On the other hand, the Incubator itself also has little experience with this kind of project. How should such a project develop during incubation? Should there be any additional metrics or requirements for graduation? If we can gain more experience with these questions through incubation, I believe that would be useful for ASF. So, +1 from me. Also, could you add me to the mentor list? I am quite interested in this project for the reasons above. Best, Twice On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 2:33 PM Guangdong Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > I have reviewed the Maka proposal and the discussion. I support > accepting Maka into the Apache Incubator. > > Maka has a coherent technical direction: a local-first and > provider-neutral agent runtime and workspace, with Desktop, CLI/TUI, > and headless surfaces built around durable execution records, explicit > permission boundaries, and recoverable task and session state. This is > a meaningful problem area with value beyond any single model provider > or hosted control plane. > > The project also brings an existing public Apache-2.0 codebase and > public project materials for contribution, security, architecture, > design, changelog, and notices. I believe it has sufficient technical > substance and an initial community to begin the Apache incubation > process. > > I recognize the concerns raised about the project's young history, the > early contribution and import pattern, code provenance, and the need to > demonstrate a broader and more independent contributor community. > These are material concerns. I do not view incubation as evidence that > they are already resolved; rather, I expect them to be concrete early > milestones for the PPMC and mentors: public and verifiable provenance > and IP work, mailing-list-based decision making, transparent governance, > and sustained growth of independent contributors and committers. > > On balance, I believe Maka is suitable to begin incubation and that the > Apache Incubator provides the right framework to address these matters > in public. > > Best regards, > Guangdong Liu > > On 2026/08/09 18:20:21 tison wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > Following the discussion thread [1], I call > > for a formal vote to accept Maka into the Apache Incubator. > > > > As a reminder, the Maka Proposal can be found at [2]. > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/0n79l7dbz9jm694rpnbrxtn8f6lmnw1j > > [2] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/spaces/INCUBATOR/pages/446070971/Maka+Proposal > > > > Please cast your vote: > > > > [ ] +1, Accept Maka into the Apache Incubator > > [ ] 0, I don't care > > [ ] -1, Do not accept Maka into the Apache Incubator, because ... > > > > The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours, and only votes from the > > Incubator PMC members are binding. Votes from everyone are welcome. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Best, > > tison. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
