On Sep 15, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Ryan McKinley wrote:
= Droids planning to move out =
Lab Droids (est. 2007-02, PI: Thorsten Scherler) is considering
moving
on to the Incubator. Currently, the lab is preparing incubation,
including drafting a proposal at the Incubator Wiki and looking
for a
champion and mentors. We are very excited about that, since
providing an
ecosystem for projects on the way from the first line of code until
incubation is one of the goals of the Labs project, and Droids - if
successful - would be the first lab to follow this path
ultimately. Some
discussion came up, here and on the Incubator's general list,
about the
process how to proceed with labs aiming to become a project's
subproject, instead of going TLP. According to our bylaws, going
through
the Incubator is inevitable. And the Incubator surely is the right
place
to determine how to properly deal with that.
I'm reading over the previous thread and the bylaws, and trying to
get my head around the most effective next steps for Droids.
The key messages are:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-To-incubate-or-start-subproject-directly--(was-Re%3A-Looking-for-a%09Champion)-p19396492.html
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-To-incubate-or-start-subproject-directly--(was-Re%3A-Looking-for-a%09Champion)-p19440800.html
http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
Assuming an existing PMC agrees they want labs code to start a
subproject, that PMC is responsible to make sure the code is
kosher. The responsibility is with the receiving PMC, *not* Labs.
As far as the Labs bylaws, can't we just change the droids status
to "Completed"?
You can only do that by _Labs_ PMC vote. And my guess would be that
the PMC would /promote/ (to the Incubator) rather than /complete/
the labling.
Consider the example where solr may want to add JSON parsing. The
path to include noggit in a solr release surely does not require
going through incubation!
I don't think so. The lab was conceived with the clear intention
that it should not be a way around the Incubator.
But on the other hand, as far as Droids is concerned, from what I
see I get the impression that the labling is preparing a proper
Incubation anywa. And you never know what might come out of that -
some projects entered incubation to become a subproject and went out
as TLP :-)
I'm really impressed with the community support Droids is attracting
right now.
By the same token, it's ASF licensed. Any PMC can take it and include
it and is the responsibility of the receiving PMC to do it's due
diligence on, AIUI the license. See Roy's message on the "Re: To
incubate or start subproject directly? (was Re: Looking for a Champion)"
I only vaguely remember the founding, but I don't think anyone is
getting around Incubation, I just don't think it is clear that it
needs to go through incubation to begin with.
However, if the receiving PMC doesn't want to do incubation b/c it
feels there will be enough a community in a decent amount of time,
then why does it matter? Isn't it the receiving PMC's
responsibility? Why should Labs care what happens to a project that
has left labs for another place within the ASF? I fail to see how
the situation is any different from the case where Thorsten had gone
directly to a PMC and said "I'd like to start a subproject named
Droids" and that PMC either votes for it or not.
I think the trick becomes that we don't want there to be two projects
that are Droids (even if there named differently), one in Labs and one
in the receiving PMC, even though this seems perfectly legal under the
ASF license. Thus, I don't see why the Labs project can't just be
marked as "completed" and then refers to the new subproject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
