Matthieu Riou wrote:

> I can't see why having releases would lead to the lab being a lightweight
> incubator.

If labs could make releases, why would any committer want to go thru
incubation?

As for non endorsing: what does that mean? that we should just ignore
the act that releasing stuff out *is* going to be used, get into a maven
repository and just exist on its own?

And sure, it wasn't supported, nor properly vetted legally, but now it's
out there and despite the warnings, people now depend on it (such 'non
endorsing' warnings are not like licenses that you can stick to the code
and move with it... the incubator has enough trouble making the press
understand the difference between a project entering the incubator and
one exiting it, I *DO*NOT* want to have to deal with the same crap).

I continue to think that if you feel the need to be able to do software
releases, what you need is an incubator podling, not a lab.

BTW, this is not just my personal opinion: this was the consensus
reached among a month of discussions withing the ASF members and the
board approved this project because of such consensus.

At the same time, the bylaws require 2/3 of the PMC votes to change any
rule, so it's not completely out of the question, but looking around it
seems that the PMC is aligned in thinking that labs should start out
without releases and see what happens... because opening the door for
releases now makes it *a lot* harder to shut it down later if it does
turn out to be a potential overlap with the incubator.

Put yourself in our shoes: labs is uncharted territory and we are
responsible, to the board and to the rest of the foundation, to provide
something that is *overall* valuable to the social ecosystem, not just
more useful to you or me as individual committers. The two are not
mutually exclusive, but not by-default aligned either.

We do not know how this is going to evolve, or how much
positive/negative energy is going to end up creating.

We have drafted strict guidelines because it's much easier (socially
speaking) to relax strict rules, than to restrict relaxed rules.

We'll move on from that, where possible, by taking small reversible
steps and by adopting non-reversible steps with *great* care and *only*
when there is enough experience learned on how the system will react to
the change.

As we are just starting and we have no knowledge on how the existing
guidelines work, we'll just go on for a while before even considering
re-evaluating them.

-- 
Stefano.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to